History: Publications

Keith Simpson: To ask the Prime Minister how many Government-sponsored, official histories are in preparation; when each was commissioned; who the authors are; what the estimated date of completion is in each case; what the estimated cost in each case is; and which official histories commissioned have not been published.

Gordon Brown: holding answer 21 April 2008
	I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my predecessor (the right hon. Tony Blair) on 28 February 2005,  Official Report, columns 918-19W.
	Additional information is set out as follows:
	The following official histories have been published:
	Churchill's Man of Mystery: Desmond Morton and the World of Intelligence by Gill Bennett (published, 2006);
	The Channel Tunnel by Dr. Terry Gourvish (published, 2006);
	The Falkland's Campaign (Volumes 1 and 2) by Professor Lawrence Feedman (first published, 2005).
	The following official histories have been commissioned:
	Cabinet Secretaries by Ian Beesley in 2007;
	Joint Intelligence Committee by Dr. Michael Goodman in 2007;
	UK Accession to the EEC, Volume 2 by Sir Stephen Wall in 2007;
	SOE in Italy, Volume 2 by, Professor David Stafford in 2005
	In the financial year 2006-07, the latest year for which accounts have been published, the net cost was £176,000. This includes fees and expenses of historian and research assistants and costs associated with publication, but excludes staff costs of Cabinet Office administrative support and accommodation-related overheads. This cost is born on the Cabinet Office vote.

Internal Development

James Duddridge: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what discussions he has had with the First Minister on the co-ordination of international development work by the Scottish Executive and the Department for International Development.

Des Browne: No such discussion have taken place. Department for International Development officials maintain contact with their Scottish Executive counterparts, to ensure international development policies remain complimentary to the UK Government's overall objectives.
	We are aware that the Scottish Executive has recently consulted on the focus of their policies in this area, and we will consider the future outcome of this exercise.

Developing Countries: Economic Growth

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what steps the Government has taken in the last year to assist developing countries to  (a) manage economic growth and  (b) deal with changes as a result of growth.

Gillian Merron: The information requested is as follows:
	 (a) The UK Government have committed £37 million over the next three years to establish an International Growth Centre. The centre will bring world-class experts to developing countries to help them put in place policies that support growth and undertake research on new challenges to growth—for example, on low carbon growth. We also work directly with partner countries to develop prioritised growth strategies that fit their own circumstances. The Department for International Development is also working to promote trade policies that help developing countries trade and will spend £409 million ($750 million) a year on aid for trade up to 2010 to build infrastructure and trade capacity in developing countries.
	 (b) DFID supports developing countries, as appropriate to each country, to identify and manage the consequences of growth to ensure that growth can be sustained in the long-run, the vulnerable are protected and that economic growth lifts as many people out of poverty as possible.

Departmental Public Expenditure

Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how much funding was provided to  (a) museums, galleries and libraries,  (b) the arts,  (c) sport and  (d) heritage from (i) the public purse and (ii) lottery funding in each year since 1997, expressed in 2007-08 prices.

Gerry Sutcliffe: The figures requested are given in the following tables.
	
		
			  Museums, galleries and libraries funding at 2006-07 prices 
			  £ million 
			  Financial year  Museums, galleries and libraries funded through DCMS.  Museums, galleries and libraries HLF 
			 1997-98 401.4 160.5 
			 1998-99 363.2 175.3 
			 1999-2000 391.0 107.7 
			 2000-01 391.5 106.3 
			 2001-02 414.9 119.4 
			 2002-03 431.2 118.3 
			 2003-04 440.4 112.9 
			 2004-05 442.4 157.4 
			 2005-06 468.2 116.0 
			 2006-07 489.2 83.1 
			 2007-08(1) 526.3 (2)— 
			 (1) Plans (2) Figures not yet available.  Note: DCMS funded data extracted from the audited, published, Appropriation Accounts and Resource Accounts 
		
	
	The figures in the 'Museum, galleries and libraries funded through DCMS' column represents grant in aid funding of the 22 DCMS sponsored museums, the British Library and Public Lending Right and the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council; in addition to the six independent bodies receiving grants. All figures are adjusted to 2006-07 prices and include both resource and capital spending.
	The information in the lottery column represents the value of awards by the Heritage Lottery Fund to museums, galleries and libraries. This information has been supplied directly by the Heritage Lottery Fund and are not comparable to lottery figures for arts and sport which are drawn down from the National Lottery Distribution Fund. The figures are for the UK as a whole and are adjusted for 2006-07 prices.
	
		
			  Arts funding for England in 2006-07 prices 
			  £ million 
			  Financial year  Arts funded through DCMS  Lottery drawdown 
			 1997-98 244.4 393.2 
			 1998-99 242.4 388.3 
			 1999-2000 273.3 248.6 
			 2000-01 280.1 256.9 
			 2001-02 289.7 249.7 
			 2002-03 334.8 198.8 
			 2003-04 396.8 197.5 
			 2004-05 418.2 231.1 
			 2005-06 422.4 197.5 
			 2006-07 431.2 147.0 
			 2007-08 412.9 (1)— 
			 (1) Figures not yet available  Note: DCMS funded data extracted from the audited, published, Appropriation Accounts and Resource Accounts 
		
	
	The figures in the 'Arts funded through DCMS' column represent grant in aid to the Arts Council England and central departmental expenditure on the arts, adjusted for 20067-07 prices. They include spending under the Capital Modernisation Fund which represents £78.5 million (in cash terms) between 2002-03 and 2004-05.
	The lottery data represent funding drawdown by the Arts Council for England only.
	
		
			  Sport funding for England on 2006-07 prices 
			  £ million 
			  Financial year  Sport funded through DCMS  Lottery drawdown 
			 1997-98 62.4 190.2 
			 1998-99 59.9 433.4 
			 1999-2000 61.4 298.2 
			 2000-01 61.7 271.6 
			 2001-02 73.1 340.8 
			 2002-03 148.0 342.1 
			 2003-04 134.8 256.3 
			 2004-05 230.6 179.3 
			 2005-06 280.3 207.9 
			 2006-07 378.0 121.4 
			 2007-08(1) 399.3 (2)— 
			 (1) To date. (2) Figures not yet available.  Note: DCMS funded data extracted from the audited, published, Appropriation Accounts and Resource Accounts. 
		
	
	The figures in the 'Sport funded through DCMS' column represent DCMS grant in aid to Sport England, UK Sport and the Football Licensing Authority, and central departmental expenditure on Sports adjusted for 2006-07 prices. They include grants for School Sport from the Department for Children, Schools and Families which represents an additional £797.1 million (in cash terms) between 2002-03 and 2007-08.
	The figures in the lottery column represent the value of grants awarded in England by Sport England only. These are derived from the Department's lottery grant database which uses information supplied by the lottery distributors.
	They do not include the value of grants by the big lottery fund and its predecessor the new opportunities fund, under various sport related funding programmes.
	
		
			  Heritage public expenditure for England 
			  £ million 
			  Financial year  Heritage funded through DCMS  Heritage lottery drawdown 
			 1997-98 226.9 165.8 
			 1998-99 204.9 237.6 
			 1999-2000 203.6 329.7 
			 2000-01 205.5 339.8 
			 2001-02 210.2 300.2 
			 2002-03 199.0 294.1 
			 2003-04 202.8 349.5 
			 2004-05 205.5 323.8 
			 2005-06 201.7 385.0 
			 2006-07 208.0 367.2 
			 2007-08(1) 213.3 (2)— 
			 (1) To date. (2) Figures not yet available.  Note: DCMS funded data extracted from the audited, published, Appropriation Accounts and Resource Accounts 
		
	
	The figures in the 'Heritage funded through DCMS' column include grant in aid to English Heritage, the National Heritage Memorial Fund, the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment, the Churches Conservation Trust and the Occupied Royal Palaces, together with central department expenditure on the Listed Places of Worship Grant scheme, Memorial Grant scheme, Royal Parks, Royal Household property Services, Chatham Historic Dockyard Trust, Greenwich Foundation, Historic Royal Palaces and Theatres Trust.
	The figures in the lottery column represent the value of grants awarded in England by the Heritage Lottery Fund which is a UK wide distributor, so the figures are not for England only.
	All figures are adjusted to 2006-07 prices using information in the GDP deflator tables provided by the Office of National Statistics and available from the Treasury website:
	www.hm-treasury.gov.uk
	I have been advised that updated tables to adjust figures to 2007-08 prices will be available toward the end of the summer.

Departmental Sick Leave

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many of her Department's staff took more than  (a) five,  (b) 10,  (c) 15,  (d) 20,  (e) 25,  (f) 30,  (g) 35 and  (h) 40 days leave due to stress in each of the last five years, broken down by pay grade.

Jim Fitzpatrick: The detailed information requested can be provided only at disproportionate cost. However, the following table demonstrates the number of occurrences of staff taking stress-related leave in each of the last five years:
	
		
			   Number 
			 2003 113 
			 2004 168 
			 2005 196 
			 2006 190 
			 2007 240 
		
	
	This table excludes DVLA and VOSA statistics as they could provide this data only at disproportionate cost.

Fuel Poverty

Mark Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform what assessment he has made of the effects of the cost of  (a) heating oil and  (b) other fuels on levels of fuel poverty; and if he will make a statement.

Malcolm Wicks: Fuel poverty is caused by the interaction of a number of factors with the energy efficiency status of the property, the cost of energy and the household income are three of the most prominent. The impact of these three factors are shown within "The UK Fuel Poverty Strategy; 5th Annual Progress Report 2007" (available online at http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file42720.pdf).
	Official Fuel Poverty figures take into account these factors including the cost of the main heating fuel, the type of heating system and the occupancy of the household. Comparison of the costs to heat a property used in the modelling of Fuel Poverty are sourced from the Sutherland Comparative Domestic Heating Cost tables, available under copyright through http://www.sutherlandtables.co.uk/. However, the effect of separate fuels' prices is not available.

Video Games

Francis Maude: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform how many  (a) UK-owned and  (b) non-UK owned video games development companies were based in the UK in each year since 1997.

Malcolm Wicks: Data on the video and computer games sector is not regularly collated or in fact readily available to the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, particularly as the sector has not had its own separate Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code. A new SIC code for computer games has now been agreed though it will not be possible for this to deliver data until 2010 at the earliest.
	However in 2002 the Department of Trade and Industry published "From Exuberant Youth to Sustainable Maturity", a full competitiveness analysis of the computer games sector commissioned from independent consultants, Spectrum Strategy. This report showed that in 2000 there were approximately 270 games development companies in the UK, the vast majority independent (and indigenous) studios with fewer than 22 employees. Four overseas-owned companies with games studios in the UK were identified in the report.
	In October 2007 UKTI published "Playing for Keeps", a report commissioned from independent consultants Games Investor which included a range of valuable new data on the competitiveness of the UK games development sector compared to key competitor territories including the US and Canada. This report showed that in 2006 there were 160 independent (indigenous) games development companies in the UK. The report also identified two UK-owned games publishers which have one or more games development studios here. However, the number of games development studios in the UK owned by overseas companies was not specified.

Working Hours

Maria Miller: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what the average number of hours worked by  (a) full-time and  (b) part-time employees per week was in the latest period for which figures are available, broken down by region.

Edward Miliband: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the Authority to reply.
	 Letter from Karen Dunnell, dated 22 April 2008:
	As National Statistician, I have been asked to reply to your parliamentary question about the average number of hours worked by  (a) full-time and  (b) part-time employees per week, in the latest period for which figures are available, broken down by region. (200580)
	The attached table gives the average number of hours worked per week for the categories requested for the three month period ending December 2007, broken down by Government Office Region.
	Each quarter ONS publishes regional estimates of the average actual weekly hours of work for all people in employment in main and second jobs. Please visit the following link;
	http://www.statistics.gov.uk/onlineproducts/lms_regional.asp
	It should be noted that the estimates provided in the attached table are grossed using population estimates consistent with those published in 2003. We are in the process of concluding the reweighting of the Labour Force Survey (LFS) according to the latest population estimates. Reweighted data using 2007 population estimates will become publicly available on 14 May 2008.
	As with any sample survey, estimates from the LFS are subject to a margin of uncertainty.
	
		
			  Average hours worked per week( 1)  by Government Office Region: three month period ending December 2007, United Kingdom, not seasonally adjusted 
			   Hours per week 
			   All employees( 2)  Full-time employees  Part-time employees 
			 North East 32 38 17 
			 North West 33 38 17 
			 Yorkshire and Humberside 32 38 17 
			 East Midlands 33 39 18 
			 West Midlands 33 38 17 
			 East 33 39 17 
			 London 34 39 17 
			 South East 33 38 17 
			 South West 32 38 17 
			 Wales 32 38 17 
			 Scotland 32 37 18 
			 Northern Ireland 33 38 18 
			 UK 33 38 17 
			 (1) Average actual hours worked per week in main and second job. including paid and unpaid overtime. (2) Includes those who did not state whether they work full or Dart-time The estimates are grossed using population estimates consistent with those published in spring 2003.  Source:  ONS Labour Force Survey.

Departmental ICT

Peter Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to the Answer of 28 February 2008,  Official Report, column 1855W on departmental ICT, to the hon. Member for Northavon, what estimate he has made of the volume of carbon dioxide emissions his Department saved as a result of the big switch energy efficiency campaign in  (a) 2005,  (b) 2006 and  (c) 2007.

Jonathan R Shaw: holding answer 21 April 2008
	DEFRA's Sustainable Development Unit organised the 'Big Switch' campaign which ran from January to March 2006. The event aimed to change behaviours in staff by highlighting where we could all save energy. Although it is not possible to measure the precise behaviour change impact of the big switch campaign, an estimated 392 tonnes of CO2 was saved in the London and York buildings comparing the same period for 2005 to 2006.

Departmental Official Cars

Fraser Kemp: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what make and model of car  (a) he and  (b) each Minister in his Department selected as their official ministerial car; and what criteria were applied when making the decision in each case.

Jonathan R Shaw: I refer my hon. friend to the reply given to him by the Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Jim Fitzpatrick) on 10 March 2008,  Official Report, column 8.

JP Morgan

David Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much his Department and its predecessors paid to JP Morgan in each year since 1997; and what the purpose of each payment was.

Jonathan R Shaw: From information held centrally, the core-Department's financial systems record no payments made to JP Morgan since DEFRA came into being in June 2001.

Karian and Box

Greg Hands: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the value was of each contract awarded by his Department and its predecessors to Karian and Box since 1997.

Jonathan R Shaw: DEFRA came into being in June 2001. The core-Department has no record of any contracts awarded to Karian and Box.

Natural England: Sites of Special Scientific Interest

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when he plans to publish the model bye-law to enable Natural England to use its powers under section 28R of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, as amended by the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006, in respect of sites of special scientific interest.

Joan Ruddock: We have no immediate plans to draw up model byelaws for use in these circumstances. The provision for SSSI byelaws was introduced by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. Since then, the SSSI regime has been further strengthened by the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 which introduced an additional third party offence under Section 28P. Natural England is using this mechanism, as a method of dealing with damaging third party activity in SSSIs.

Temporary Employment

Anne McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many agency staff are currently employed by  (a) his Department,  (b) the Environment Agency and  (c) his Department's other agencies.

Jonathan R Shaw: Information on the numbers of employment agency staff engaged by DEFRA's executive agencies and non-departmental public bodies is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
	For the core-Department, and from information held centrally for the period February 2007 to January 2008 inclusive, the average monthly number of employment agency staff engaged by the core-Department is approximately 234.

Zurich Financial Services

David Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much his Department and its predecessors paid to Zurich Financial Services in each year since 1997; and what the purpose of the payment was in each case.

Jonathan R Shaw: DEFRA came into being in June 2001. The core-Department's financial systems record one payment to Zurich Insurance Company of £169.35 made in May 2002. The precise purpose of this small payment is unknown without further investigation given that it was made some six years ago and the cost of investigation would exceed the sum paid.

Financial Inclusion Fund: Citizens Advice Bureaux

Graham Stuart: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what funding Citizens Advice will receive from the Financial Inclusion Fund in each of the next three years; and if he will make a statement.

Gareth Thomas: I have been asked to reply.
	We have indicated that we will grant CitA £17 million, £16 million and £16.5 million in each of the next three years. This will allow them to continue to provide free-face-to-face debt advice to the financially excluded. In total, this project had helped over 90,000 clients to the end of 2007.

Armed Forces Benefits Calculator

Andrew Murrison: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate he has made of the cost of the armed forces benefits calculator; what the operating costs of the scheme are estimated to be; and if he will make a statement.

Bob Ainsworth: The contract for the armed forces' benefits calculator was awarded to Methods Consulting (a registered company on the Defence Communication Services Agency's Information and Communication Services catalogue) on 10 January 2007; throughout 2007, the calculator underwent extensive development work in close consultation with subject matter experts and the single services; this included the successful completion of a field trial involving a cross-section of ranks from each of the three services.
	Methods Consulting have sub-contracted the day-to-day development and hosting of the armed forces' benefits calculator to Thomsons Online Benefits, a company which specialises in the creation of employee 'reward' solutions. The total cost of the MOD's contract with Methods Consulting is estimated at £109,680, excluding VAT, which includes £20,160, less VAT, per annum for Thomsons Online Solutions to host the calculator for a two year period from 1 April 2008. Arrangements for the further development and hosting beyond April 2010 have yet to be decided.

Armed Forces Benefits Calculator

Andrew Murrison: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will place in the Library the  (a) objectives,  (b) evaluation and  (c) criteria for assessment used in the preparation of the Armed Forces Benefits Calculator; what benchmarking he plans to undertake to ensure that the performance of the Armed Forces Benefits Calculator compares accurately with assessments for non-armed forces individuals; and if he will make a statement.

Bob Ainsworth: Prior to the launch of the Armed Forces' Benefits Calculator, there was no mechanism in place to permit Service personnel easily to identify their total worth. The Armed Forces' Pay Review Body has previously commented that Service personnel lack awareness of the total value of their armed forces remuneration package, and that more should be done to assess and communicate the value of the package. In addition, the introduction of Joint Personnel Administration has inevitably placed a greater emphasis on the need for clear and easily accessible internal communication on pay and allowances matters. Her Majesty's Treasury has also, over the years, challenged the MOD about not communicating effectively to staff the value and merits of the armed force total reward package.
	Although some progress had been made in this area (a fact sheet is available on the Defence intranet) the information is very generic, non-interactive and not particularly accessible. The vast majority of personnel, while aware of their annual salary and allowances packages, continue to view each of these elements in isolation, and many other financial benefits remain 'invisible' (such as medical/dental care, and physical education opportunities). Building on the success of the existing Armed Forces Pension Calculator, the new Benefits Calculator was thus created to provide greater clarity of the 'total reward' package incorporating basic pay, specialist pay, individual allowances, pension, and other benefits where a realistic financial value can be attributed.
	The range of remuneration and allowance-based benefits included in the Armed Forces' Benefits Calculator will be reviewed on a regular basis to ensure they remain relevant to comparable rates in civilian life and continue to be retention and recruitment positive. In addition, the calculator includes other benefits (such as dental care and health and fitness facilities) which are not strictly remuneration or allowance-related but are included to convey the extent of the total benefits package available to Service personnel in return for military service, and to provide an indication of what replicating these benefits might cost in civilian life. The terms and conditions governing the use of the Armed Forces' Benefits Calculator state that the Calculator is for guidance purposes only, and that it is not intended to provide formal financial advice.
	Initial feedback on the operation and utility of the Armed Forces' Benefits Calculator has been very positive, and at the time of writing over 14,000 calculations had been completed. The effectiveness of the Calculator will be reviewed over the coming months, including an assessment of the relative benefits of including links to other sites/pages providing information on a variety of related matters, currently including:
	a. Discounts—principally through the Forces Discount Brochure.
	b. News/information on pay and allowances matters.
	c. Financial information, particularly in support of MOD's ongoing work with the single Services to deliver the Government's National Strategy on Financial Capability, including links to the established Financial Service Authorities' "Money Made Clear" website.

Armed Forces Benefits Calculator

Andrew Murrison: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what methodology was used to prepare the figures underpinning the Armed Forces Benefits Calculator; and if he will make a statement.

Bob Ainsworth: The Armed Forces' Benefits Calculator was developed to provide Service personnel with a quick and convenient way of working out the indicative value of their total remuneration and benefits package. The introduction of the Armed Forces' Benefits Calculator has, therefore, made it easier for personnel to make a direct comparison between their current remuneration and that being offered by civilian employers—and by doing so to demonstrate the value of their benefits package as a whole. The Armed Forces' Benefits Calculator has been developed also to provide potential recruits with a means of investigating the type of remuneration and benefits that might be available should they choose to join the armed forces. The Calculator uses a combination of existing pay rates and allowances details of which can be found at: http://www.mod.uk and some new values, which have been agreed with subject matter experts and the single Services. These new values are included to provide a broad indication of what some of the other benefits personnel receive in return for military service (such as dental care, and health and fitness facilities) might cost to replicate in civilian life.

Departmental Manpower

Daniel Rogerson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many  (a) permanent civil service posts,  (b) permanent non-Civil Service posts and  (c) temporary or agency workers in employment there were in his Department in each month since May 2005.

Derek Twigg: The number of permanent civil service posts is not held centrally. The following tables show the number of permanent civilian personnel employed by the Department on a monthly basis since May 2005.
	
		
			  MOD permanent personnel—1 May 2005 to 1 March 2008 
			  Headcount 
			  Date of strength  MOD less trading funds  Trading funds  Total 
			 May 2005 80,240 10,720 90,960 
			 June 2005 80,020 10,630 90,660 
			 July 2005 79,720 10,570 90,280 
			 August 2005 79,610 10,540 90,150 
			 September 2005 79,210 10,490 89,700 
			 October 2005 78,900 10,400 89,300 
			 November 2005 78,790 10,350 89,140 
			 December 2005 78,710 10,250 88,960 
			 January 2006 77,490 10,970 88,460 
			 February 2006 77,360 10,970 88,320 
			 March 2006 77,210 10,950 88,160 
		
	
	
		
			  Headcount 
			  Date of strength  MOD less trading funds  Trading funds  Total 
			 April 2006 76,640 10,720 87,360 
			 May 2006 76,360 10,650 87,010 
			 June 2006 76,180 10,610 86,790 
			 July 2006 75,870 10,560 86,430 
			 August 2006 75,290 10,580 85,870 
			 September 2006 74,890 10,560 85,450 
			 October 2006 74,590 10,530 85,120 
			 November 2006 74,280 10,500 84,780 
			 December 2006 74,170 10,490 84,660 
			 January 2007 73,780 10,390 84,170 
			 February 2007 73,640 10,380 84,020 
			 March 2007 73,250 10,380 83,640 
		
	
	
		
			  Headcount 
			  Date of strength  MOD less trading funds  Trading funds  Total 
			 April 2007 72,700 10,100 82,800 
			 May 2007 72,280 10,090 82,370 
			 Jun 2007 72,060 10,090 82,150 
			 Jul 2007 71,800 10,060 81,860 
			 Aug 2007 71,160 10,070 81,230 
			 September 2007 70,800 10,070 80,870 
			 October 2007 70,560 10,140 80,700 
			 November 2007 70,380 10,160 80,540 
			 December 2007 69,970 10,310 80,280 
			 January 2008 69,450 10,280 79,730 
			 February 2008 69,270 10,380 79,640 
			 March 2008 69,080 10,360 79,440 
			 1. The tables above include all non-industrial and industrial permanent staff, (casual staff are excluded). 2. Royal Fleet Auxiliary and locally engaged civilians overseas are excluded because data regarding their permanent or casual status is not centrally held. 3. The figures shown are a headcount, i.e. part-time staff are counted with equal weight to full-time staff. 4. Numbers are rounded to the nearest 10. Numbers ending in "5" have been rounded to the nearest multiple of 20 to prevent systematic bias. 5. Figures are individually rounded and may not sum precisely to the totals shown. 
		
	
	Data for permanent non-civil service personnel and temporary or agency workers employed over the period is not centrally held on the Department's human resources management system (HRMS) and could only be produced at disproportionate cost.

Iraq: Peacekeeping Operations

Harry Cohen: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions  (a) Ministers and  (b) the UK's special envoy to Iraq had with representatives of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) in Iraq on policy on  (a) de-Baathification of Iraq and  (b) disbandment of the Iraqi army in 2003; what representations they made to the CPA on the subjects; and what the Government's policy was on both subjects.

Des Browne: Government officials held regular discussions with coalition partners, including those in the Coalition Provisional Authority, on issues concerning the reconstruction of Iraq. As Foreign and Commonwealth Office Ministers and I have explained previously, events moved very quickly in the aftermath of the removal of Saddam Hussein and it should be remembered that by the end of initial hostilities, the Iraqi army had effectively dissolved itself. There was at the same time overwhelming popular pressure throughout Iraq for de-Ba'athification to begin, reflecting the suffering and resentment among ordinary Iraqis arising from three decades of repression by Saddam Hussein's regime. Policy and plans therefore remained fluid in light of developments on the ground.

Departmental Sick Leave

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills how many of his Department's staff took more than  (a) five,  (b) 10,  (c) 15,  (d) 20,  (e) 25,  (f) 30,  (g) 35 and  (h) 40 days leave due to stress since establishment, broken down by pay grade.

David Lammy: The Department was set up as part of the machinery of Government changes on 28 June 2008. Electronic records for the Department are presently maintained on two data bases in the legacy departments from which staff were transferred when DIUS was formed. It would involve disproportionate cost to obtain the level of detail required to answer this question. However, the percentage of working days lost by the Department's staff attributed to mental health related conditions during the nine months from July 2007 to March 2009 amounted to 12 per cent. of all sickness absence.
	The Department is committed to providing a safe working environment and has put in place a range of measures to support all employees on health and wellbeing issues, including the provision of professional counselling and occupational health services.

Higher Education

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills 
	(1)  how many and what proportion of people from each UCAS tariff band from each socio-economic group  (a) were applicants for and  (b) were accepted for full-time undergraduate degree courses in the last year for which information is available;
	(2)  how many and what proportion of applicants from each socio-economic group for full-time undergraduate courses were in each UCAS tariff band in the last year for which figures are available.

Bill Rammell: The latest available information for the 2007 year of entry from the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UGAS) is shown in the table. This table covers applicants and accepted applicants to all full-time undergraduate courses that are covered by UCAS broken down by tariff band and socio-economic background.
	The number and proportion of applicants from each socioeconomic group to full-time undergraduate courses from each UCAS tariff band can also be found in the table.
	
		
			  Number and proportion of English domiciled applicants and accepted applicants to all full—time undergraduate courses( 1)  from each UCAS tariff band and national statistics socio—economic classification (NS—SEC): Year of entry 2007 
			Applicants  Accepted  a pplicants 
			  Tariff Band  NS—SEC Group  Number  Percentage  of known  Number  Percentage  of known 
			 0(2) 1. Higher managerial and professional occupations 11,124 13.6 8,233 14.1 
			  2. Lower managerial and professional occupations 23,376 28.7 16,764 28.8 
			  3. Intermediate occupations 13,322 16.3 9,345 16.0 
			  4. Small employers and own account workers 5.743 7.0 4,247 7.3 
			  5. Lower supervisory and technical occupations 3,130 3.8 2,337 4.0 
			  6, Semi—routine occupations 18,120 22.2 12,462 21.4 
			  7, Routine occupations 6,683 8.2 4,861 8.3 
			  Total Known 81,498 100.0 58,249 100.0 
			  Unknown 61,134 — 45,837 — 
			  Total 142,632 — 104,086 — 
			  Number of known in groups 1—3 47,822 58.7 34,342 59.0 
			  Number of known in groups 4—7 33,676 41.3 23,907 41.0 
			   
			 1 - 119 1. Higher managerial and professional occupants 2,499 13.2 1,878 13.6 
			  2. Lower managerial and professional occupations 5,258 27.8 3,833 27.9 
			  3. Intermediate occupations 2,599 13.8 1,919 13.9 
			  4. Small employers and own account workers 1,878 9.9 1,337 9.7 
			  5. Lower supervisory and technical occupations 1,168 6.2 832 6.0 
			  6. Semi—routine occupations 3,658 19.4 2,653 19.3 
			  7. Routine occupations 1,833 9.7 1,309 9.5 
			  Total Known 18,893 100.0 13,761 100,0 
			  Unknown 6,828 — 4,849 — 
			  Total 25,721 — 18,610 — 
			  Number of known in groups 1—3 10,356 54.8 7,630 55 
			  Number of known in groups 4—7 8,537 452 6,131 44.6 
			   
			 120-239 1. Higher managerial and professional occupations 6,633 17.6 5,404 17.9 
			  2. Lower managerial and professional occupations 11,432 30.3 9.204 30.5 
			  3. Intermediate occupations 5,067 13.4 4,037 13.4 
			  4. Small employers and own account workers 3,526 9.3 2,756 9.1 
			  5. Lower supervisory and technical occupations 2,275 6.0 1,795 5.9 
			  6. Semi—routine occupations 5,934 15.7 4,714 15.6 
			  7. Routine occupations 2,893 7.7 2,262 7.5 
			  Total Known 37,760 100.0 30,172 100.0 
			  Unknown 10,019 — 7,886 — 
			  Total 47,779 — 38,058 — 
			  Number of known in groups 1—3 23,132 61.3 18,645 61.8 
			  Number of known in groups 4—7 14,628 38.7 11,527 38.2 
			   
			 240-159 1 . Higher managerial and professional occupations 15,026 23.l 13,290 23.2 
			  2. Lower managerial and professional occupations 21,011 32.2 18,510 32.3 
			  3. Intermediate occupations 9,024 13.8 7,993 13.9 
			   
			  4. Small employers and own account workers 5,347 8.2 4,657 8.1 
			  5 Lower supervisory and technical occupations 3,384 5.2 2,955 5.2 
			  6. Semi—routine occupations 7,926 12.2 6,931 12.1 
			  7. Routine occupations 3,456 5.3 3.008 5.2 
			  Total Known 65,174 100.0 57,344 100.0 
			  Unknown 12,831 — 11,101 — 
			  Total 78,005  68,445 — 
			  Number of known in groups 1—3 45,061 69.1 39,793 69.4 
			  Number of known in groups 4—7 20,113 30.9 17.551 30.6 
			   
			 360-479 1 . Higher managerial and professional occupations 16,072 31.1 14,571 31.3 
			  2. Lower managerial and professional occupations 17,122 33.1 15,453 33.1 
			  3. Intermediate occupations 6,808 11.2 6,169 13.2 
			  4. Small employers and own account workers 3,438 6.6 3,084 6.6 
			  5. Lower supervisory and technical Occupations 2,079 4.0 1,874 4.0 
			  6. Semi—routine occupations 4,451 8.6 3,928 8.4 
			  7. Routine occupations 1J37 3.4 1,532 3.3 
			  Total Known 51,707 100.0 46,619 100.0 
			  Unknown 7,759 — 6,885 — 
			  Total 59,466 — 53,504 — 
			  Number of known in groups 1—3 40,002 77.4 36,201 77.7 
			  Number of known in groups 4—7 11,705 22.6 10,418 22.3 
			   
			 480 and over 1 . Higher managerial and professional occupations 9,084 38.6 8,408 38.8 
			  2. Lower managerial and professional occupations 7,509 31.9 6,962 32.2 
			  3. Intermediate occupations 2,950 12.5 2,721 12.6 
			  4. Small employers and own account Workers 1,092 4.6 984 4.5 
			  5. Lower supervisory and technical occupations 699 3.0 651 3.0 
			  6. Semi—routine occupations 1,674 7.1 1,466 6.8 
			  7. Routine occupations 531 2.3 459 2.1 
			  Total Known 23,539 100.0 21,651 100.0 
			  Unknown 2,935 — 2,605 — 
			  Total 26,474 — 24,256 — 
			  Number of known in groups 1—3 19,543 83.0 18,091 83.6 
			  Number of known in groups 4—7 3,996 17.0 3,560 16.4 
			   
			 Total 1. Higher managerial and professional occupations 60,438 21.7 51,792 22.7 
			  2. Lower managerial and professional Occupations 85,708 30.8 70,726 31.0 
			  3. Intermediate occupations 39,770 14.3 32,184 14.1 
			  4 . Small employers and own account workers 21,024 7.5 17,065 7.5 
			  5. Lower supervisory and technical occupations 12,735 4.6 10,444 4.6 
			  6. Semi—routine occupations 41,763 15.0 32,154 14.1 
			  7. Routine occupations 17,133 6.2 13,431 5.9 
			  Total Known 278,571 100.0 227,796 100.0 
			  Unknown 101,506 — 79,163 — 
			  Total 380,077 — 306,959 — 
			  Number of known in groups 1—3 185,916 66.7 154,702 67.9 
			  Number of known in groups 4—7 92,655 33.3 73,094 32.1 
			 (1) Includes applicants and accepted applicants to all full-time undergraduate courses that are covered by UCAS.  (2) Applicants and accepted applicants in the tariff band of zero either had qualifications that were not covered buy the UCAS tariff or their tariff score was unknown.   Source:  Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS). 
		
	
	Overall, for all students from England, the UCAS figures show that, compared to 2006, applicants to full-time undergraduate courses who had been accepted for entry in 2007, rose by 6.1 per cent. to 307,000 the highest ever. Latest figures for students applying for entry in 2008, show that applicants in England are up by 7.1 per cent. compared to 2007.

Higher Education: Admissions

Jeff Ennis: To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills what information his Department holds on  (a) the targets each member of the Russell Group of Universities has set itself for widening participation for students from poorer backgrounds in the last two years and  (b) performance against those targets.

Bill Rammell: Information on targets for widening participation for students from poorer backgrounds for each member of the Russell Group is not available. The Department does not set targets for individual institutions and does not hold information on targets they may set themselves.
	Information in the tables is taken from table T1a of the Performance Indicators in Higher Education. Figures from the academic years of 1997-98 to 2001-02 was published by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE), and figures from the 2002-03 academic year onwards were published by the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA). Figures for the 2006-07 academic year will become available in June this year.
	The figures in table 1 show the proportions of UK-domiciled young entrants to full-time first degree courses at Russell Group higher education institutions in the UK who were from lower social classes/lower socio-economic classes from 1997-98 to 2005-06, along with the benchmarks for each institution. In the 2002-03 academic year the: National Statistics Socio-Economic Classification (NS-SEC) was first introduced. It replaced the Social Class (SC) classification, and the two classifications cannot be directly compared.
	The figures in table 2 show the proportions of UK-domiciled young entrants to full-time first degree courses at Russell Group higher education institutions in the UK who were from low participation neighbourhoods from 1997-98 to 2005-06, along with the benchmarks for each institution.
	For each institution, the performance indicator is shown against a benchmark. This is a sector average which is adjusted for each institution to take into account the following factors: subject of study, qualifications on entry and age on entry. The benchmarks can be used to show how a university is performing compared to the sector as a whole, and also help to determine whether a meaningful comparison can be drawn between two or more universities. The benchmarks are not targets.
	
		
			 Table 1: Proportion of UK-domiciled young(1) entrants to full-time first degree courses at Russell Group institutions who were from lower social classes/lower socio-economic classes(2) 
			   Social class IIIM, IV, V( 2) 
			   1997-98  1998-99  1999-2000  2000-01  2001-02 
			  Russell Group HEIs  %  Benchmark  %  Benchmark  %  Benchmark  %  Benchmark  %  Benchmark 
			 The University of Birmingham 17.1 18.6 16.7 18.8 19.2 20.1 18.9 19.9 21.0 20.0 
			 The University of Bristol 10.6 16.3 9.1 16.3 107 16.3 10.7 16.4 11.0 16.0 
			 The University of Cambridge(3) 7.8 11.4 8.1 12.4 8.6 12.5 9.1 12.7 9.0 14.0 
			 Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine 13.3 16.6 16.8 16.8 17.0 16.5 14.5 16.5 14.0 16.0 
			 King's College London 18.4 20.2 17.2 19.1 18.6 19.3 19.6 19.0 17.0 20.0 
			 The University of Leeds 15.4 19.5 15.3 19.2 15.6 19.6 16.3 19.4 16.0 20.0 
			 The University of Liverpool 22.0 20.8 21.3 21.1 22.2 22.2 21.3 222 22.0 23.0 
			 London School of Economics and Political Science 11.9 15.5 12.5 16.1 12.5 14.8 15.9 15.8 18.0 16.0 
			 The University of Manchester 16.7 19.1 17.9 19.1 17.6 19.9 19.0 19.5 19.0 20.0 
			 The University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne 16.8 20.0 15.0 19.9 16.3 20.4 16.7 20.9 17.0 22.0 
			 The University of Nottingham 13.8 17.1 13.2 17.5 14.5 17.3 14.0 17.7 15.0 18.0 
			 The University of Oxford 7.8 12.5 9.1 13.3 8.9 12.9 9.6 13.3 9.0 13.0 
			 The University of Sheffield 17.3 18.2 17.6 17.8 17.0 18.1 18.5 18.6 18.0 19.0 
			 The University of Southampton 17.4 21.5 17.5 21.5 17.5 21.5 17.4 20.7 18.0 22.0 
			 University College London 13.9 18.0 14.4 17.9 13.9 17.7 14.9 17.8 15.0 18.0 
			 The University of Warwick 16.9 17.2 15.8 17.7 14.4 17.0 15.3 17.4 15.0 17.0 
			 Cardiff University 11.0 180 13.3 19.6 14.2 19.6 12.8 18.8 19.0 21.0 
			 The University of Edinburgh 21.0 20.7 21.0 20.9 21.0 21.8 20.9 21.5 15.0 19.0 
			 The University of Glasgow 20.3 20.7 20.1 20.6 19.1 21.1 18.2 20.9 21.0 22.0 
			 Queen's University Belfast 27.4 19.9 29.6 20.9 29.9 21.0 27.5 20.6 31.0 22.0 
		
	
	
		
			   NS-SEC 4, 5, 6, 7 
			   2002-03  2003-04  2004-05  2005-06 
			  Russell Group HEIs  %  Benchmark  %  Benchmark  %  Benchmark  %  Benchmark 
			 The University of Birmingham 22.1 22.0 22.6 23.5 21.6 23.2 19.9 23.5 
			 The University of Bristol 13.7 20.0 14.1 21.4 13.4 19.6 16.4 20.7 
			 The University of Cambridge(3) 11.3 17.3 11.4 18.2 12.4 17.8 n/a n/a 
			 Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine 17.9 19.7 17.9 21.0 18.7 20.6 17.3 20.8 
			 King's College London 22.7 23.0 21.0 22.2 20.5 22.4 21.3 22.8 
			 The University of Leeds 19.9 23.7 19.6 24.1 19.2 23.1 18.9 23.7 
			 The University of Liverpool 25.2 25.7 25.3 25.8 23.5 24.7 23.6 25.1 
			 London School of Economics and Political Science 18.0 19.8 17.3 20.4 19.5 19.6 17.5 19.4 
			 The University of Manchester 21.7 22.2 21.0 23.2 21.2 22.3 20.7 23.0 
			 The University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne 20.4 23.9 20.9 23.8 19.5 23.3 20.3 23.6 
			 The University of Nottingham 16.9 21.0 16.1 21.6 15.7 20.7 16.9 22.3 
			 The University of Oxford 11.0 17.2 11.5 17.8 12.3 17.3 11.4 18.3 
			 The University of Sheffield 19.0 21.9 19.8 22.0 20.0 21.8 21.3 22.6 
			 The University of Southampton 18.6 24.7 20.0 24.2 19.1 23.3 20.0 24.1 
			 University College London 17.8 22.1 17.3 21.5 17.9 20.4 17.5 20.5 
			 The University of Warwick 17.8 22.0 18.6 20.9 17.7 20.0 16.7 207 
			 Cardiff University 22.5 23.7 21.8 24.5 21.7 24.0 21.1 24.9 
			 The University of Edinburgh 17.8 21.8 15.3 21.9 17.1 20.8 17.7 21.5 
			 The University of Glasgow 22.9 23.2 22.8 23.3 22.7 23.2 23.7 23.1 
			 Queen's University Belfast 36.0 26.1 36.0 26.7 34.4 25.9 34.4 26.9 
			 n/a = not available (1 ')Young' refers to entrants who are under 21-years-old. (2) Due to a change in classification, from social class to socio-economic class in 2001, figures prior to 2001 and figures front 2002 onwards cannot be directly compared. (3) The University of Cambridge has taken the opportunity of a new student record system to review the recording of student data, This change prevented the submission of data suitable for presentation at an institutional level in the 2005-06 academic year,: A full set of data will be included in this year's publication.  Source: Performance Indicators in Higher Education, published by HESA 
		
	
	
		
			  Table 2: Proportion of UK-domiciled young( 1)  entrants to full-time first degree courses at Russell Group institutions who were from low participation neighbourhoods 
			   1997-98  1998-99  1999-2000  2000-01  2001-02 
			  Russell Group HEIs  %  Benchmark  %  Benchmark  %  Benchmark  %  Benchmark  %  Benchmark 
			 The University of Birmingham 8.2 9.0 8.2 9.3 8.1 10.0 9.0 9.8 9.5 10.2 
			 The University of Bristol 3.6 8.1 4.5 8.4 4.8 8.3 4.3 8.1 4.8 8.3 
			 The University of Cambridge(2) 4.3 6.5 4.8 6.3 5.5 6.9 4.7 6.7 4.9 7.4 
			 Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine 5.1 7.9 6.4 8.4 5.6 8.2 6.8 8.0 6.9 8.3 
			 King's College London 8.2 9.8 7.8 9.6 7.8 9.7 6.7 9.4 6.9 10.1 
			 The University of Leeds 7.9 9.4 8.3 9.5 7.8 9.8 8.4 9.6 9.5 10.3 
			 The University of Liverpool 12.3 10.2 12.0 10.4 13.4 11.0 13.1 11.2 13.7 11.5 
			 London School of Economics and Political Science 6.8 7.9 5.9 8.3 5.2 7.8 6.7 7.7 8.6 8.7 
			 The University of Manchester 8.6 9.3 9.5 9.6 9.9 9.9 10.5 9.8 12.5 10.3 
			 The University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne 9.3 9.6 9.8 9.6 10.1 10.0 10.5 10.3 10.7 10.8 
			 The University of Nottingham 7.2 8.2 6.9 8.5 6.4 8.6 7.2 8.6 6.3 9.0 
			 The University of Oxford 4.4 6.7 4.4 7.0 5.6 7.1 5.6 7.1 4.7 7.2 
			 The University of Sheffield 7.8 8.8 9.2 8.7 9.7 9.0 8.9 9.1 10.1 9.6 
			 The University of Southampton 6.3 10.4 6.1 10.6 6.2 10.4 6.4 10.0 6.5 10.6 
			 University College London 6.3 8.9 5.2 9.1 6.1 9.0 5.5 8.9 5.2 9.3 
			 The University of Warwick 6.7 8.5 6.8 8.9 6.7 8.8 6.9 8.7 7.3 9.0 
			 Cardiff University 7.4 8.9 11.1 10.0 9.9 10.2 9.6 10.3 9.2 10.3 
			 The University of Edinburgh 15.1 10.2 8.8 9.8 8.1 9.9 7.3 9.4 8.1 10.1 
			 The University of Glasgow 9.9 10.0 14.5 10.4 15.6 11.0 17.1 10.8 17.1 11.3 
			 Queen's University Belfast 9.0 9.8 8.9 10.1 8.4 10.2 7.9 10.0 9.6 10.7 
		
	
	
		
			   2002-03  2003-04  2004-05  2005-06 
			  Russell Group HEIs  %  Benchmark  %  Benchmark  %  Benchmark  %  Benchmark 
			 The University of Birmingham 11.1 10.9 10.1 11.4 9.5 11.0 8.9 11.0 
			 The University of Bristol 5.7 9.7 5.7 10.0 5.2 9.1 5.5 9.3 
			 The University of Cambridge(2) 5.4 8.9 6.1 8.9 5.3 8.7 n/a n/a 
			 Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine 6.5 9.6 7.5 10.1 8.4 9.2 7.1 8.9 
			 King's College London 7.9 10.8 8.6 10.6 6.4 10.3 8.2 10.6 
			 The University of Leeds 9.9 11.3 9.4 11.9 9.4 10.8 8.9 10.9 
			 The University of Liverpool 14.9 12.0 14.1 12.2 13.6 11.6 12.6 11.7 
			 London School of Economics and Political Science 6.3 9.9 6.7 10.2 4.3 9.0 7.8 9.1 
			 The University of Manchester 10.5 10.7 11.8 11.0 10.3 10.5 10.8 10.4 
			 The University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne 10.2 11.1 9.7 11.0 10.3 10.8 10.6 10.7 
			 The University of Nottingham 6.7 10.3 6.6 10.2 6.7 9.6 5.9 10.0 
			 The University of Oxford 5.8 9.2 5.8 8.8 4.6 8.4 5.0 8.5 
			 The University of Sheffield 9.5 10.5 9.1 10.5 11.1 10.2 9.9 10.4 
			 The University of Southampton 5.5 11.5 7.0 11.6 5.6 10.8 6.4 11.0 
			 University College London 6.4 11.1 6.5 10.3 6.4 9.6 6.3 9.4 
			 The University of Warwick 7.6 11.3 8.1 10.1 6.9 9.4 7.0 9.5 
			 Cardiff University 9.7 11.1 10.4 11.7 9.2 11.4 10.2 11.6 
			 The University of Edinburgh 8.9 10.9 8.7 10.8 8.2 10.1 9.0 10.1 
			 The University of Glasgow 16.8 11.2 15.8 11.5 16.7 11.3 15.8 11.1 
			 Queen's University Belfast 9.1 11.7 8.2 13.0 8.2 12.2 10.61 12.4 
			 n/a = not available (1) 'Young' refers to entrants who are under 21-years-old (2) The University of Cambridge has taken the opportunity of a new student record system to review the recording of student data. This change prevented the submission of data suitable for presentation at an institutional level in the 2005-06 academic year. A full set of data will be included in this year's publication.

Higher Education: Scholarships

Linda Gilroy: To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills what assessment he has made of levels of awareness of the availability of bursaries and scholarships for higher education; and if he will make a statement.

David Lammy: holding answer 29 Febru a ry 2008
	As part of the evaluation of the recent Student Finance communications campaign, we have assessed the level of awareness of bursaries among both students aged 16 to 19 and their parents.
	The research data shows that 38 per cent. of parents and 32 per cent. of students are aware of the availability of bursaries as a result of the campaign.
	The responsibility for promoting bursaries and scholarships rests primarily with the universities and colleges who offer higher education courses.
	We continue to support the work of universities and colleges through the Department's own communications activity and make efforts to raise awareness of bursaries alongside all other elements of the higher education student finance package.
	More broadly, post campaign research shows that currently 81 per cent. of students and 80 per cent. of parents are now aware that there is financial support available for students.
	The most recent campaign has shown a marked increase in the awareness of the specific messages relating to non-repayable maintenance grants.
	The latest tracking research shows that 93 per cent. of parents and 88 per cent. of students had watched the campaign on TV. And that 99 per cent. of parents and 94 per cent. of students had seen the campaign on any of the media used. Although the campaign has non repayable grants as its focus it uses messages on all elements of the student finance package and therefore works to promote bursaries.
	One of the main calls to action by the campaign is to visit the campaign website which contains the bursary map. Visitors can use this tool, which is actively updated by DIUS, to find out what bursaries are available from the HEI's they are interested in attending.

Departmental Leaflets

Danny Alexander: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what arrangements are made for customer testing of the public information leaflets issued by his Department; and what proposals there are for the  (a) recording and  (b) evaluation of such tests.

Anne McGuire: All 66 public information leaflets that are being produced by the Department have been tested with customers prior to publication and general release.
	The results of this testing have been used to further develop the leaflet's content and, where necessary, leaflets have been rewritten and tested again in order to ensure that issues identified by customers have been addressed. The central team that has produced the leaflets maintains a record of the testing that has taken place for each leaflet and the Department has undertaken to test all its leaflets with customers in the future.

Industrial Health and Safety: Construction

Stephen Hepburn: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people employed in the construction industry in  (a) Jarrow constituency,  (b) South Tyneside,  (c) the North East and  (d) the UK have died in the workplace in each year since 1997.

Anne McGuire: The following table shows the numbers of reportable fatal injuries to workers in the construction industry. This does not include deaths in the workplace that are unrelated to work activities. The available geographic data does not allow the constituency of Jarrow to be identified.
	
		
			  Fatal injuries to workers in the construction industry( 1)  as reported to all enforcing authorities 1997-98  to  2006-07( 2) 
			   South Tyneside( 3)  North East( 4)  Great Britain( 5) 
			   Employees  Self-employed  Employees  Self-employed  Employees  Self-employed 
			 1997-98 — — 2 1 58 22 
			 1998-99 — — — — 47 18 
			 1999-2000 — — — — 61 20 
			 2000-01 — — 1 — 73 32 
			 2001-02 — — 8 — 60 20 
			 2002-03 — — 1 — 56 14 
			 2003-04 — 1 3 1 52 19 
			 2004-05 — — — 1 55 14 
			 2005-06 — — 2 1 43 17 
			 2006-07 — — — 1 50 27 
			 (1) Identified by Standard Industrial Classification 1992 (SIC92) Section F-Construction. (2 )Provisional. (3) Identified by local authority code 4520 'South Tyneside'. (4) Identified by Government Office Region and includes South Tyneside LA. (5 )Includes North East Government Office Region.

Children: Day Care

Maria Miller: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many and what proportion of children attending  (a) daycare and  (b) sessions with a childminder spoke English as a second language in each year since 1997.

Beverley Hughes: Data is not collected centrally on the number or proportion of children attending full day care or childminders for whom English was a foreign language.

Departmental Flexible Working

Maria Miller: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many and what proportion of staff in his Department and its predecessors had flexible working arrangements in each year since 1997.

Kevin Brennan: Since 1997, all staff in the Department and its predecessors have had the opportunity to work flexibly. A very high proportion of staff have made use of the opportunity, including the 15 per cent. that work part-time and the over 50 per cent. who have occasionally or regularly worked at home over the last 12 months.
	We do not keep records of exact figures centrally and could be produced only at disproportionate cost.

Departmental Vetting

Maria Miller: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what steps his Department has taken to ensure that  (a) paid staff and  (b) volunteers are subject to a criminal records bureau check before starting work in the last 12 months.

Kevin Brennan: All individuals recruited to a regulated post or to a post where they have access to personal or sensitive data about children or vulnerable adults, have been subject to, or are currently undergoing, enhanced Criminal Records Bureau check, as a matter of course.
	We do not currently have any volunteers in the Department.

Departmental Written Questions

Mark Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what progress his Department has made on its Parliamentary Question tracking system to record whether Named Day questions are provided with a substantive answer on the due day since November 2007.

Kevin Brennan: Although parts of the Department's PQ tracking system have been upgraded there is still some outstanding work to be completed on the parts of the system that provide management information reports. In the interim, the parliamentary team are maintaining a manual check on all named day questions to monitor the timeliness of replies.

Pre-School Education: Standards

Maria Miller: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many and what proportion of childcare staff in nurseries had an appropriate level 3 or higher qualification in  (a) Basingstoke constituency,  (b) Hampshire and  (c) England in each of the last five years.

Beverley Hughes: The Childcare and Early Years Providers survey collects information on staff qualifications that are relevant to working with children and young people. The percentage of paid staff in England holding at least a level 3 qualification for each year available is shown in the following table.
	
		
			  Table: Percentage of paid staff holding at least a Level 3 qualification 
			   2003  2005  2006 
			 Full day care 57 63 73 
			 Full day care in children's centres n/a n/a 80 
			 Sessional 44 55 58 
			 After school clubs 37 n/a 51 
			 Holiday clubs 30 n/a 53 
			 Childminders n/a n/a 38 
			 Nursery schools 78 n/a 80 
			 Primary schools with nursery and reception classes 72 n/a 77 
			 Primary schools with reception but no nursery classes 64 n/a 71 
			  Notes: 1. Children's centres were included in the survey for the first time In 2006; therefore data is not available for previous years. 2. After school and holiday clubs were sampled differently in 2005 and comparable figures for this year are not available. 3. In 2006 childminders who said they held a level 3 qualification were asked whether they had a childminding certificate and if so whether they held all of the modules. Those who only held some of the modules were not classed as holding a level 3 qualification. Comparable data for previous years is not available. 4. Early years settings in maintained schools were not included in the 2005 survey. Data is not available at a local authority level.

Schools: Finance

Mark Lancaster: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families when he intends to announce the results of the recent applications for funding from the Basic Needs Allocation Safety Valve Fund.

Jim Knight: My officials have now assessed all applications to the basic need safety-valve. However, it was necessary for the Department to seek clarification from a number of authorities on the information provided. I expect to be in a position to take final decisions on the applications shortly, and to make the results known shortly thereafter.

Textbooks

Nick Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what his policy is on allowing pupils to take school text books home.

Jim Knight: It is for schools to decide whether or not pupils should take textbooks home from school.

Departmental ICT

Vincent Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the  (a) start date,  (b) original planned completion date,  (c) current expected completion date,  (d) planned cost and  (e) current estimated cost is for each information technology project being undertaken by her Department and its agencies; and if she will make a statement.

Parmjit Dhanda: IT projects(1) undertaken by Communities and Local Government (CLG) and its Agencies are as shown in the table.
	(1) Two of CLG's major change projects, Firelink and FireControl, do not feature in the table as in both cases the IT component represents only one part of the overall project activity. FireLink is a radio communications system project for the Fire and Rescue Service across Great Britain, which started in mid 2002 and was originally due to complete at the end of 2007. It is now expected to complete in mid 2009. Estimated costs have remained the same at £400 million for Great Britain. FiReControl is principally a business change project, which started in 2004 with an expected completion date in 2009. It is now expected to complete in 2011. Estimated costs have risen from £120 million to £190 million.
	
		
			  Communities and Local Government (including regional co-ordination unit and Government offices in the regions) 
			  Project  Start date  Original planned completion date  Expected completion date  Originally planned costs (£000)  Estimated planned costs (£000) 
			 Website Rationalisation (incorporating Info4local Rebuild project)(1) December 2005 June 2008 December 2008 3,200 (2)3,600 
			 Fire Incident Recording System January 2006 December 2006 March 2008 1,300 2,990 
			 LINK (New corporate desktop system) February 2005 October 2006 February 2008 2,064 2,064 
			 EDRMS October 2006 December 2006 June 2008 699 699 
			 Replacement Infrastructure for Peoplesoft HR System November 2006 May 2007 March 2008 537 537 
			 CLG Payroll Replacement System May 2007 March 2008 March 2008 382 382 
			 SAP Implementing Benefits January 2008 February 2009 February 2009 364 364 
			 Smarter Business Process (SAP Enhancement) September 2007 April 2008 August 2008 350 350 
			 Blackberry Service July 2007 April 2008 April 2008 239 239 
			 Government Offices Human Resources Database, further development April 2007 March 2008 March 2008 150 176 
			 Government Offices Online Performance Management System, further development April 2007 March 2008 March 2008 150 150 
			   
			  (b) Agencies of the Department 
			  Planning Inspectorate  
			 Fast-track Householder Appeal Service—Stage 1 (Validation and Planning) September 2007 December 2007 February 2008 130 130 
			 Server Virtualisation Project October 2007 March 2008 March 2008 105 105 
			 Programme and Project Management Tool (Hydra) March 2007 October 2007 February 2008 95 95 
			   
			  Fire Service College  
			 Fire Service College Managed Learning System(3) January 2006 April 2007 May 2008 5,500 5,500 
			   
			  QEII Conference Centre  
			 Meeting Matrix June 2007 September 2007 February 2008 65 65 
			 (1) A project to rebuild the Info41ocal website was approved in November 2004 at a cost of £244,000. The project was deferred for later incorporation into the Department's Website Rationalisation Project. (2) Plus £400 for Info41ocal. (3) The FRS Managed Learning Environment referred to in the answer of 3 September 2007,  Official Report, columns 1645-6W is the same project. The longer delivery timetable is the outcome of a college review of the business case for the project. It was decided the range of benefits from the project should be extended, resulting in more deliverables, and that more time should be allowed to implement the extended package. The costs figures given in that answer refer to the whole life costs for the project including operations costs following the transition into live operation.

Eco-Towns: Leicestershire

Edward Garnier: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how much and what proportion of the area within Harborough District that is proposed to be occupied by the eco-town promoted by the Co-operative Wholesale Society and English Partnerships is currently used for  (a) agricultural and  (b) airport transport purposes; and how much of that area is covered by (i) in use and (ii) redundant permanent structures.

Caroline Flint: Like all the shortlisted locations for eco-towns the one promoted by the Co-Operative Wholesale Society and English Partnerships is subject to consultation and at this stage final decisions on the size and location are still to be determined. In the consultation document "Eco-towns—Living a greener future" that was published on 3 April we have provided a description of the location for this eco-town and copies of this document are available in the House Library. Also as part of the Co-operative Estates local consultation they have set up a website that provides further information about their proposal including land use.

Housing: Carbon Emissions

Julia Goldsworthy: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many new homes have been built since the zero rate of stamp duty for zero-carbon homes was introduced.

Caroline Flint: h olding answer 21 April 2008
	 The zero-rate of stamp duty for zero-carbon homes was introduced on the 1 October 2007. In England there were 48,467 dwellings completed in the quarter 1 October to 31 December 2007.
	 Source:
	P2 house building returns from local authorities and the National House Building Council (NHBC)

Non-Domestic Rates

Eric Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government whether the Local Authority Business Growth Incentive scheme for 2008-09 will include incentive payment for additional business rate revenue collected due to  (a) empty property business rates and  (b) an increase in the number on frequency of empty dwellings.

John Healey: Under the original three-year LABGI scheme, the Chancellor allocated up to £l billion to local authorities in England and Wales for 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08. The Government intend to make payments under a reformed scheme from 2009-10, and is considering these plans. This will allow us to look carefully at the lessons learned from the original scheme and to consult widely on how to get the best possible outcomes from a reformed scheme.

Regional Planning and Development: Greenwich Peninsula

Eric Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what her most recent estimate is of the revenue which will accrue to the public purse from the redevelopment of the Greenwich Peninsula.

Caroline Flint: A re-assessment is currently under way. It is expected that a new financial model for forecasting returns from the development, will be completed by summer 2008. Once this is in place, English Partnerships will be able to make a revised assessment of the latest forecast return.
	The National Audit Office (NAO) have recently looked into progress on the delivery of the Greenwich Peninsula regeneration project. The NAO report is still being prepared but will include an updated assessment by both NAO and EP of the latest forecast financial return to the taxpayer. However as the new model is not yet finalised these assessments of necessity will derive from the existing financial model developed in 2004 which was not designed for monitoring profits and which is out of date in terms of phasing of the development. NAO's report is likely to be published before summer recess.

Departmental Sick Leave

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many working days were lost by his Department due to stress-related illness in each of the last 24 months.

Maria Eagle: Detailed monthly information on sickness absence for the whole of the Ministry of Justice is not held centrally and could be provided only at a disproportionate cost. The only Department that holds this information is the public sector Prison Service and is included in table 1 as follows. Information for NOMS and OCJR and for the former DCA for 2006-07 is derived from a Cabinet Office report on sickness absence in the civil service published on 7 February 2008 and is set out in table 2. Earlier data is not available. The Cabinet Office report for 2005 did not provide a detailed breakdown of reasons for sickness absence by individual Department. The tables include data on days lost that were classified as mental and behavioural disorders, a high proportion of which will be stress related.
	
		
			  Table  1: Working days lost due to mental and behavioural disorders in the public sector Prison Service 
			   Working days lost attributed to mental and behavioural disorders 
			 January 2006 10,642 
			 February 2006 9,420 
			 March 2006 9,913 
			 April 2006 9,684 
			 May 2006 10,350 
			 June 2006 10,752 
			 July 2006 11,427 
			 August 2006 11,548 
			 September 2006 10,714 
			 October 2006 11,735 
			 November 2006 12,019 
			 December 2006 12,710 
			 January 2007 11,698 
			 February 2007 10,412 
			 March 2007 11,426 
			 April 2007 10,445 
			 May 2007 11,191 
			 June 2007 10,831 
			 July 2007 12,103 
			 August 2007 12,409 
			 September 2007 11,614 
			 October 2007 11,961 
			 November 2007 11,055 
			 December 2007 11,004 
		
	
	
		
			  Table 2: Total working days lost and proportion attributed to mental and behavioural disorders in former Department for Constitutional Affairs, the National Offender Management Service and the Office of Criminal Justice Reform—2006-07 
			   Total days lost  Proportion lost to mental disorders (percentage) 
			 Magistrates Court Committee 106,438 19 
			 HM Courts Service 60,911 17 
			 Former Department for Constitutional Affairs 9,689 14 
			 Tribunal Service 7,681 13 
			 Office of the Public Guardian 1,066 38 
			 Scotland Office 121 0 
			 Wales Office 95 6 
			 National Offender Management Service 11,135 20 
			 Office of Criminal Justice Reform 1,347 29 
			  Note: The Cabinet Office published a report on sickness absence in the civil service on 7 February 2008. The report included an analysis of the days lost due to sickness absence for each Department by reasons for absence. The table sets out the figures for 2006-07 for the constituent parts of this Department, which were in place prior to the creation of the Ministry of Justice in May 2007. Information on the reasons for sickness absence prior to 2006-07 is not readily available and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Prisoners: Databases

James Clappison: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what estimate he has made of the number of people detained in prison who are not recorded on the detentions database; and what information is held by his Department on non-UK nationals released from prison without notification to the Home Office, as referred to by the National Audit Office report on asylum and migration (HC(2003-04)625) of 25 May 2004.

Liam Byrne: I have been asked to reply.
	The section of the National Audit Office report on Asylum and Migration statistics published on 25 May 2004 to which is referred relates to the accuracy of statistics held by IND (now known as the UK Border Agency) governing the number of individuals held in detention for immigration reasons.
	Since the report was published, the DELMIS system, to which it referred, has been superseded by a different system known as the case information database (CID). This is designed for use within all areas of the Agency as opposed to just the detention service directorate. It is through CID that the Agency is able to ensure that it keeps accurate records on all individuals' immigration cases as well as ensuring that caseworkers are aware of where an individual resided or whether they were detained.
	The chief executive of the UK Border Agency has written to the Home Affairs Committee on several occasions over the past 18 months and explained that we have reviewed and strengthened our processes in identifying those foreign nationals serving custodial sentences and should be considered for deportation following the events of April 2006.

Prisons: Employment

Edward Garnier: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what steps he is taking to ensure the reliability of figures on prisoners' hours of purposeful activity provided by prisons.

Maria Eagle: In 2007-08 the Prison Service issued new guidance for its establishments for recording purposeful activity. This guidance included a refined set of activities and definitions. Additionally, a more effective method of capturing purposeful activity data has been introduced through the use of electronic forms. The data reported also continues to be validated by management controls and by both a self-audit process and independent audit.

Prisons: Wrexham

Ian Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 3 April 2008,  Official Report, columns 1188-9W, on prisons: Wales, on how many occasions representatives of NOMS custodial estates have met representatives of Wrexham county borough council to discuss the siting of a prison in Wrexham in the last 12 months.

Maria Eagle: There have been no meetings between representatives of NOMS Estates and Wrexham county borough council to discuss the siting of a prison in Wrexham in the last 12 months. Representatives from NOMS Estates attended meetings in August and November 2007 with the North Wales Criminal Justice Board to discuss potential sites for a prison in North Wales. These meetings included representatives from Wrexham county borough council and other councils in North Wales. In November 2007 a visit to a site put forward by the Board was also made at which a representative of the council was present. This site was not in Wrexham.

Ethiopia: Human Rights

Tony Lloyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent representations he has made to his counterparts in the Government of Ethiopia on security and observance of human rights in the Somali region of Ethiopia.

Meg Munn: The Government are concerned at reports of human rights abuses in the Somali region of Ethiopia and raises the issue with the Government of Ethiopia at every suitable opportunity. Recently, my noble Friend Lord Malloch-Brown raised the issue of human rights in the Somali region when he met Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi in late January. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary discussed the Somali region with the Ethiopian Foreign Minister, Seyoum Mesfin, when they met in November 2007. Our ambassador in Addis Ababa continues to raise these issues with the Government of Ethiopia at regular intervals.

Ethiopia: Human Rights

Tony Lloyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent assessment he has made of the extent of observance of human rights in the Somali region of Ethiopia.

Meg Munn: We are concerned at reports of human rights abuses in the Somali region of Ethiopia. If breaches of human rights law are proved, then we will condemn them unreservedly and expect those responsible to be held to account. The UK supports the UN's lead in working with the Government of Ethiopia to improve the situation in the Somali region, including to help ensure human rights are respected fully. We recognise Ethiopia's legitimate security concerns in the region and call on Ethiopia to ensure its security response is proportionate and implemented carefully to ensure there is no suffering on the civilian population.
	The Government raise their concerns with the Ethiopian Government at regular opportunities. Most recently, our ambassador in Addis Ababa discussed ways to improve the situation in the Somali region with the Ethiopian Foreign Minister, Seyoum Mesfin, in March. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary discussed the Somali region with the Ethiopian Foreign Minister when they met in November 2007. My noble Friend Lord Malloch-Brown raised the issue of human rights when he met Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi in late January.

Indonesia: Human Rights

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what reports he has received of the treatment by the government of Indonesia of  (a) West Papuan protesters and  (b) those raising flags of independence in Timika and Manokwari.

Meg Munn: Following events in Kwamki Baru, near Timika, on 1 December 2007, we understand that six people have been charged with subversion under the Indonesian criminal code. In March 2008 nine individuals were arrested in Manokwari and four in Jayapura following student protests where the 'Morning Star' flag was displayed. Flying the Papuan national 'Morning Star' flag is currently illegal under Indonesian law. Special autonomy legislation allows for the use of Papuan symbols and anthems, but the local legislation that is required to confirm the chosen symbols and anthems has yet to be passed.
	Officials from our embassy in Jakarta continue to monitor the situation closely and understand that representatives from Church organisations have been allowed access to those detained.
	Dr. Manfred Nowak, UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, visited Indonesia in November 2007, at the invitation of the Indonesian Government. Dr. Nowak presented his report to the UN Human Rights Council on 10 March. As part of his wider report on Indonesia, Dr. Nowak made references to prison conditions in Papua. We are continuing to study Dr. Nowak's report and are consulting with EU partners on how we might engage with the Indonesian Government on its findings.

Kosovo: Politics and Government

Michael Ancram: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what response he plans to make to the proposal tabled at the United Nations by the government of Serbia that the part of Kosovo which has a Serb majority should be transferred to Serbia.

Jim Murphy: No such proposal from the Serbian Government has been tabled at the UN. A proposal was handed to a senior representative of the UN Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo by the Serbian Minister for Kosovo. Other members of the Serbian Government have publicly distanced themselves from the proposal.
	We do not believe that partition of Kosovo would be a sustainable solution or contribute to regional stability. Partition has been ruled out by the Contact Group and the EU. Both Belgrade and Pristina rejected this option during the status negotiations.

Malta: Health Services

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs pursuant to the Answer of 25 March 2008,  Official Report, column 140W, on Malta: health services, if he will place in the Library a copy of the speech given by UK officials defending the language on sexual and reproductive rights; whether the term sexual and reproductive rights includes abortion and a right to abortion; and if he will make a statement.

Meg Munn: During the Commission on the Status of Women in February and March 2008, the UK aligned itself with the EU speech which did refer to sexual and reproductive health rights. A copy will be placed in the Library of the House.
	UK officials did not give a national speech but spoke during informal negotiations at the Commission on the Status of Women to defend language already agreed by the EU on sexual and reproductive health and rights.
	The position of the Government are consistent with international agreements such as the 1994 Cairo International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) and Beijing where there was agreement among delegations that the prevention of unwanted pregnancies should be given priority through expanded family planning services. ICPD also affirmed that in no case should abortion be promoted as a method of family planning. These agreements also recognise the health impact of abortion complications—unsafe abortion is a major cause of maternal death and injury—and agree that, where permitted by national law, abortion should be safe and that in all cases women should have access to quality services for the management of complications following abortion.
	The Government consider that sexual and reproductive rights are key to improving the status of women and advancing their human rights globally and therefore should not be seen solely in the context of abortion.

Syria: Foreign Relations

Michael Ancram: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent contact the Government has had with the government of Syria; and if he will make a statement.

Kim Howells: The UK has full diplomatic relations with Syria. Officials from our embassy in Damascus maintain regular contact with the Syrian Government.
	UK Ministers have occasional contact with Syrian Ministers when we judge that such meetings would advance the UK's interests. On 8 November 2007 my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary and I met the Syrian Deputy Prime Minister Abdullah Dardari and Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal Miqdad at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in London. On 28 September 2007 my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary met Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem at the UN in New York.
	We continue to call on the Syrian Government to play a constructive role in the Middle East: to cease its support for Palestinian rejectionist groups; support the Government of Iraq; and work to support the election of a consensus President in Lebanon.

Breast Cancer: Screening

Jon Trickett: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the rate for breast cancer re-screening within 36 months was in  (a) England,  (b) West Yorkshire and  (c) the Leeds/Wakefield screening area in each of the last six months; and what proportion of eligible women in the Leeds/Wakefield breast screening area received scans within 36 months in the most recent period for which figures are available.

Ann Keen: Data on the 36 month interval for breast cancer screening is collected quarterly by the national health service cancer screening programmes. Data for England and each breast screening unit is shown in the following table. Monthly interval rates of 38 months are also given as an indicator of how close intervals are to the national standard of 36 months.
	
		
			  Breast screening unit  Percentage 36 month breast cancer screening interval rate  interval rate — October to December 2007  Percentage 38 month breast cancer screening interval rate  interval rate — October to December 2007 
			 England 70 88 
			 Bolton 80 99 
			 Chester 90 99 
			 Crewe 97 99 
			 East Lancashire 28 99 
			 Greater Manchester 29 61 
			 Liverpool 62 99 
			 Macclesfield 79 99 
			 North Cumbria 86 100 
			 North Lancashire 8 11 
			 Warrington 96 99 
			 Wigan 40 99 
			 Wirral 99 99 
			 North Tees 73 90 
			 Newcastle 90 96 
			 Gateshead 74 99 
			 Pennine 37 97 
			 North Yorkshire 96 99 
			 Leeds Wakefield 38 66 
			 Humberside 34 43 
			 Sheffield 77 97 
			 Doncaster 97 99 
			 Barnsley 100 100 
			 Rotherham 96 100 
			 North London 17 26 
			 West of London 96 97 
			 Barking and Havering 95 97 
			 Central and East London 55 76 
			 South East London 76 99 
			 South West London 80 96 
			 Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire 63 95 
			 Chelmsford and Colchester 96 98 
			 Cambridge and Huntingdon 61 98 
			 Epping 2 2 
			 East Suffolk 97 99 
			 James Paget 62 94 
			 King's Lynn 39 84 
			 Norfolk and Norwich 63 97 
			 Peterborough 67 97 
			 South Essex 57 86 
			 West Suffolk 95 98 
			 City Hospital (Birmingham) 96 97 
			 Dudley and Wolverhampton 98 99 
			 Hereford and Worcester 94 98 
			 North Staffordshire 96 99 
			 Shropshire 57 93 
			 South Birmingham 99 99 
			 South Staffordshire 97 97 
			 Walsall and Sandwell 99 100 
			 Warwickshire, Solihull and Coventry 99 100 
			 Avon 80 98 
			 Cornwall 98 99 
			 Dorset 97 98 
			 East Devon 96 98 
			 Gloucestershire 97 99 
			 Somerset 84 99 
			 South Devon 90 98 
			 West Devon 99 99 
			 Wiltshire 95 99 
			 Northampton 93 99 
			 South Derbyshire 93 99 
			 North Derbyshire 98 98 
			 North Nottinghamshire 99 99 
			 Kettering 98 99 
			 Leicester 94 96 
			 Lincolnshire 28 41 
			 Nottingham 98 99 
			 Jarvis Centre (Guildford) 98 99 
			 West Sussex 61 95 
			 Brighton 16 61 
			 Canterbury 92 98 
			 Maidstone 41 98 
			 Medway 70 99 
			 Aylesbury 100 100 
			 Wycombe 100 100 
			 Milton Keynes 98 99 
			 Reading 98 99 
			 Windsor 100 100 
			 Oxford 45 99 
			 North and Mid Hampshire 44 96 
			 Southampton and Salisbury 21 84 
			 Portsmouth 99 99 
			 Isle of Wight 97 98 
		
	
	Information on breast screening coverage in the Yorkshire and Humber Strategic Health Authority (SNA) area is shown in the following table. Coverage is the proportion of women resident and eligible that have had a test with a recorded result at least once in the previous three years.
	
		
			  Breast screening programme: coverage of women aged 53-64 by specified organisations, at 31 March 2007 
			Eligible population( 1)  Number of women screened (less than three years since last test)  Coverage (less than three years since last test)  (percentage) 
			  England 3,690,074 2,805,717 76.0 
			  
			 Q32 Yorkshire and the Number SHA 373,320 282,165 75.6 
			   O f which:
			 5NY Bradford and Airedale Teaching PCT 30,921 23,481 75.9 
			 5J6 Calderdale PCT 14,873 11,059 74.4 
			 5N2 Kirklees PCT 27,772 21,795 78.5 
			 5N1 Leeds PCT 48,063 34,507 71.8 
			 5N3 Wakefield District PCT 25,500 17,218 67.5 
			  Notes: 1. This is the number of women in the registered population less those recorded as ineligible. 2. The coverage of the breast screening programme is the proportion of women resident and eligible that have had a test with a recorded result at least once in the previous three years. 3. Coverage of the screening programme is currently best assessed using the 53-64 age group as women may be first called at any time between their 50th and 53rd birthdays. 4. The breast screening programme covers women aged 50-64 but it was extended to invite women aged 65-70 in April 2001. The last unit began inviting women aged 65-70 in April 2006 and full coverage should be achieved by 2008-09.  Source:  KC63

Continuing Care: Essex

Simon Burns: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what steps the Government has taken to ensure that those in the Mid Essex Primary Care Trust area entitled to continuing NHS healthcare are receiving it;
	(2)  what steps he has taken in the Mid Essex Primary Care Trust area to ensure that Government guidelines on the equitable entitlement to continuing NHS healthcare achieve their objectives.

Ivan Lewis: The "National Framework for NHS Continuing Healthcare and NHS-funded Nursing Care in England", implemented from 1 October 2007, sets out the process for determining eligibility for national health service continuing healthcare. To minimise variation in interpretation of the principles outlined in the Framework and to inform consistent decision-making, the Department has developed the national decision support tool in conjunction with stakeholders. The decision support tool supports practitioners in obtaining a full picture of needs and indicates a level of need that could constitute a primary health need as set out in the Framework. The decision support tool, combined with practitioners' own experience and professional judgment, will enable them to apply the primary health need test in practice, in a way that is consistent with the limits on what can be lawfully provided by local authorities. It is too soon to gauge the Framework's impact. We will review the Framework and the decision support tool in September 2008.
	We have been informed that Mid Essex Primary Care Trust is committed to the principles of continuing healthcare and to working with its partners to provide funding and support to any individual who meets the national criteria.

Developing Patient Partnerships Programme: Finance

Sandra Gidley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health for what reason his Department decided to cease funding for the Developing Patient Partnerships programme; and what arrangements have been made for the continuity of the provision of its services to patients.

Ben Bradshaw: The Department has supported Developing Patient Partnerships through two section 64 specific grants since April 2003. The latest grant covering 2006-08 was agreed with Developing Patient Partnerships on the basis they would no longer require central funding as they would be self sufficient from April 2008 through increasing its subscriber base. Developing Patient Partnerships are currently in discussions with several organisations to make their material available to patients in the future.

Eyesight: Testing

Anne Milton: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many and what proportion of people aged 60 and over had an NHS sight test in the last year for which figures are available.

Ann Keen: The number of general ophthalmic services (GOS) sight tests paid for by the national health service, for persons aged 60 and over, in England, in the year ending 31 March 2007 was 4,518,672. Based on Office for National Statistics population estimates for mid 2006 the sight tests number is 41.9 per cent. of the population aged over 60.
	This information is available in Table B4 of the "General Ophthalmic Services: Activity Statistics for England and Wales, Year Ending 31 March 2007" report. This table also includes the number of tests for persons aged 60 and over as a proportion of the total number of sight tests.
	This report, published by The Information Centre for health and social care on 31 July 2007, is available in the Library and is also available on-line at:
	www.ic.nhs.uk/pubs/gosactivity310307
	Numbers of GOS sight tests paid for by the NHS, for persons aged 60 and over and as a proportion of the 60 and over population for the year ending 31 March 2008 are due to be published in the "General Ophthalmic Services: Activity Statistics for England and Wales—Year Ending 31 March 2008" report. This report is due to be published, by The Information Centre for health and social care, in July 2008. This report will also include the number of sight tests for persons aged 60 and over as a proportion of the total number of sight tests.

Health Professions: Training

Jim Dowd: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what measures are under consideration by his Department to ensure that strategic health authorities meet their service level agreement commitments regarding multi-professional education and training.

Ann Keen: In 2007-08 a service level agreement (SLA) and accountability framework has been issued to ensure that strategic health authorities (SHAs) are held to account for the training they support. The SLA also sets out that there should be a learning and development agreement in place with service providers to underpin the education and training funds passed to national health service trusts. The role of the Department should be to focus on outputs and accountability rather than on ensuring a fixed amount of money is spent for a particular purpose regardless of local priorities. Strategic health authorities (SHAs) provide relevant financial and activity data four times per year to the Department. SHAs also published an annual investment plan by 30 June 2007 setting out their planned investment in education and training for the year. We will be asking SHAs for an end of year report on the SLA shortly. They also provide relevant financial and activity data up to four times per year to the Department. We will be asking SHAs for an end of year report on the SLA shortly.

Health Services: Finance

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many bids he has received for designation as an Academic Health Services Centre; and what criteria will apply to determining the outcome of such bids.

Dawn Primarolo: holding answer 2 April 2008
	The Department is currently in the process of developing proposals for the roll out of Academic Health and Science Centres.

Medical Records: Disclosure of Information

Martin Horwood: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  whether his Department has published guidance on the duty of foundation trusts to release medical records to the next of kin of a patient who has died in their care;
	(2)  whether his Department has powers to require foundation trusts to release medical records to the next of kin of a patient who has died in their care.

Ben Bradshaw: holding answer 21 April 2008
	Access to deceased patients' health records is permitted under the Access to Health Records Act 1990 (AHR) though this does not automatically provide a right of access for next of kin. Applications for access under the AHR may be made by the deceased's personal representative and any person who may have a claim arising from the patient's death, this may be the next of kin in some cases.
	The Department has provided the national health service with guidance on access to the records of deceased but is currently reviewing this guidance in light of recent legal cases. Essentially, the decision whether or not to disclose records of the deceased is the responsibility of the organisations holding the record, taking into account obligations of confidentiality and any directions provided by the deceased individual.
	The Department does not have the authority to require foundation trusts to release health records of deceased patients, however foundation trusts must comply with the AHR in the same way as other NHS trusts.

NHS: Pay

Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether changes to the unsocial hours payment were agreed in the 2004 Agenda for Change.

Ann Keen: The agenda for change agreement included an interim regime for unsocial hours that had some early implementer and some Whitley provisions. It included an agreement that the NHS Staff Council would work toward developing a new harmonised unsocial hours arrangement. These arrangements were agreed in February 2008, with an effective date of 1 April 2008.

NHS: Pay

Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether he has informed NHS staff of the changes to unsocial hours payment.

Ann Keen: Responsibility for communication to individual members of staff rests with the employing organisation. However, changes to the unsocial hours arrangements were discussed, developed and agreed in partnership with the unions and NHS employers represented on the NHS Staff Council. NHS Employers have written to employing organisations to ensure they are aware of the changes and have provided information on their website, which may be used by managers to support local briefing.

NHS: Pay

Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recent changes he has made to the unsocial hours payment; and if he will break down the percentage change by  (a) pay band and  (b) staff role.

Ann Keen: The old arrangements were related to Whitley staff groups and pay scales, and there is no easy read across to agenda for change pay bands. The changes to the unsocial hours payments have an effective date from 1 April 2008, the impacts will vary but in headline terms:
	any time on Saturday (midnight to midnight) and any week day after 8 pm and before 6 am is time plus 50 per cent. for band 1, time plus 44 per cent. for band 2, time plus 37 per cent. for band 3 and time plus 30 per cent. for bands 4 to 9; and
	all time on Sundays and public holidays (midnight to midnight) is double time for band 1, time plus 88 per cent. for band 2, time plus 74 per cent. for band 3, time plus 60 per cent. for bands 4 to 9.
	It is not possible to identify what this means by role, payment depends on their band. However, it is important to note that all staff employed in ambulance organisations will remain on the original prospective agenda for change system, as it has worked well in early implementers and for national roll-out.

NHS: Public Participation

Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the formula is for funding Local Involvement Networks; and what the  (a) unweighted funding per council and  (b) unweighted funding per 100 people is for each local authority in 2008-09.

Ann Keen: The Department received an allocation of £84 million over three years from HM Treasury to fund the establishment and costs incurred by local involvement networks (LINks). The allocations to local authorities (LAs) were based on two elements used in many similar cases to take account of key geographical factors such as deprivation, sparsity, area costs, etc. The first was a general baseline payment of £60,000 awarded to each LA. The second was calculated according to the relative needs formulae (RNF), which is used to allocate funds to LAs in other areas of work.
	The RNF relates to three population groups: children, younger adults (aged 18-64) and older people (aged 65 and over). The RNF includes needs components and costs components that are specific to the three age groups. The children's formula consists of a basic amount per resident child aged 0 to 17, and top-ups for deprivation, fostering cost and area costs. The older people's formula consists of a basic amount per person aged 65 and over and top-ups for age, deprivation, sparsity, low income from fees and charges, and area costs. The younger adults' formula consists of a basic amount per person aged 18-64 and tops-ups for deprivation and area costs.
	The formulae is therefore defined in terms of need and costs. There is not a weighting component that could be extracted from the calculations because the calculations use local values ('weights') for 'needs' and for 'costs', and removing them would make it impossible to calculate the funding allocations. Extracting weights from the calculation would have the effect of each local authority receiving an equal funding allocation.
	Using the allocations for LINks for 2008-09, we have been able to calculate the amount of local funding per 100 people (£) for 2008-09 and this is shown in the following table.
	
		
			  LA  Grant per 100 people (£) 
			 Cornwall 48.02 
			 Cumbria 46.75 
			 Gloucestershire 39.85 
			 Hertfordshire 34.11 
			 Lincolnshire 41.56 
			 Norfolk 41.08 
			 Northamptonshire 37.80 
			 Northumberland 53.23 
			 Oxfordshire 35.13 
			 Somerset 43.60 
			 Suffolk 39.89 
			 Surrey 30.67 
			 Warwickshire 40.62 
			 West Sussex 36.49 
			 North Yorkshire 37.46 
			 Bedfordshire 42.25 
			 Buckinghamshire 37.29 
			 Derbyshire 41.67 
			 Dorset 45.47 
			 Durham 51.08 
			 East Sussex 46.68 
			 Hampshire 29.89 
			 Leicestershire 34.52 
			 Staffordshire 36.58 
			 Wiltshire 40.39 
			 Cambridgeshire 37.11 
			 Cheshire 37.41 
			 Devon 40.23 
			 Essex 35.28 
			 Kent 35.57 
			 Lancashire 38.98 
			 Nottinghamshire 39.53 
			 Shropshire 51.74 
			 Worcestershire 40.13 
			 Isles of Scilly 2,856.58 
			 Barking and Dagenham 88.88 
			 Barnet 55.38 
			 Bexley 59.27 
			 Brent 68.26 
			 Bromley 50.46 
			 Croydon 55.82 
			 Ealing 59.84 
			 Enfield 62.80 
			 Haringey 76.30 
			 Harrow 64.44 
			 Havering 58.42 
			 Hillingdon 58.86 
			 Hounslow 64.82 
			 Kingston upon Thames 65.22 
			 Merton 62.28 
			 Newham 86.22 
			 Redbridge 61.81 
			 Richmond upon Thames 59.44 
			 Sutton 63.73 
			 Waltham Forest 73.75 
			 Camden 77.36 
			 Greenwich 84.34 
			 Hackney 99.50 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 83.68 
			 Islington 91.86 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 78.81 
			 Lambeth 76.17 
			 Lewisham 76.98 
			 Southwark 78.32 
			 Tower Hamlets 97.68 
			 Wandsworth 60.58 
			 Westminster 74.95 
			 City of London 817.07 
			 Bolton 63.09 
			 Bury 66.64 
			 Manchester 63.67 
			 Oldham 68.97 
			 Rochdale 70.99 
			 Salford 73.03 
			 Stockport 53.23 
			 Tameside 68.29 
			 Trafford 61.30 
			 Wigan 57.15 
			 Knowsley 92.51 
			 Liverpool 66.74 
			 St. Helens 74.40 
			 Sefton 61.94 
			 Wirral 64.27 
			 Barnsley 67.90 
			 Doncaster 59.27 
			 Rotherham 63.20 
			 Sheffield 50.11 
			 Gateshead 73.26 
			 Newcastle upon Tyne 63.15 
			 North Tyneside 68.83 
			 South Tyneside 84.23 
			 Sunderland 62.66 
			 Birmingham 55.39 
			 Coventry 58.10 
			 Dudley 56.56 
			 Sandwell 70.42 
			 Solihull 58.55 
			 Walsall 66.60 
			 Wolverhampton 71.32 
			 Bradford 52.50 
			 Calderdale 65.43 
			 Kirklees 50.68 
			 Leeds 41.10 
			 Wakefield 56.74 
			 Isle of Wight Council 83.04 
			 Bath and North East Somerset 62.20 
			 Bristol 51.06 
			 South Gloucestershire 48.67 
			 North Somerset 60.31 
			 Hartlepool 108.96 
			 Middlesbrough 88.09 
			 Redcar and Cleveland 83.13 
			 Stockton-on-Tees 66.53 
			 East Riding of Yorkshire 47.64 
			 Kingston upon Hull 67.42 
			 North East Lincolnshire 75.82 
			 North Lincolnshire 71.57 
			 York 56.46 
			 Luton 70.14 
			 Milton Keynes 57.59 
			 Derby 63.31 
			 Bournemouth 73.63 
			 Poole 74.95 
			 Darlington 96.69 
			 Brighton and Hove 58.87 
			 Portsmouth 63.62 
			 Southampton 61.78 
			 Leicester 64.06 
			 Rutland 179.13 
			 Stoke-on-Trent 67.90 
			 Swindon 60.26 
			 Bracknell Forest 76.80 
			 West Berkshire 63.82 
			 Reading 72.81 
			 Slough 86.64 
			 Windsor and Maidenhead 66.86 
			 Wokingham 56.81 
			 Peterborough 74.87 
			 Halton 92.57 
			 Warrington 60.41 
			 Plymouth 60.98 
			 Torbay 89.69 
			 Southend-on-Sea 77.23 
			 Thurrock 74.86 
			 Herefordshire 66.64 
			 Medway 54.10 
			 Blackburn with Darwen 87.04 
			 Blackpool 88.25 
			 Nottingham 64.28 
			 Telford and the Wrekin 73.73

NHS: Reorganisation

Michael Penning: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the evidential basis is for Lord Darzi's assessment in his interim report that the NHS is perhaps two-thirds of the way through its reform programme set out in 2000 and 2002.

Ann Keen: As stated on pages 14-15 of the NHS chief executive's annual report, published on 21 June 2007, there are three stages in the journey to reform the national health service. A copy of the report has been placed in the Library and is also available at:
	www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/AnnualReports/DH_076170
	The aim of the NHS Next Stage Review, Our NHS, our future, is to identify the way forward for a 21st Century NHS which is clinically-driven, patient-centred and responsive to local communities.

Peterborough and Stamford Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust: Perinatal Mortality

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many instances of perinatal mortality there were in Peterborough and Stamford Hospitals Foundation NHS Trust in each year since 2001; and if he will make a statement.

Ann Keen: The following table shows the number of perinatal deaths and the perinatal mortality rate for Peterborough and Stamford Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust(1) from 2001 to 2005, which is the latest data available.
	(1) The trust was founded in April 2004. The data is taken from the following hospitals that are now part of the trust: Peterborough district hospital; Edith Cavell hospital; Stamford and Rutland hospital and the district maternity unit.
	
		
			   Perinatal deaths( 1)  Perinatal mortality rate( 2) 
			 2001 31 9.4 
			 2002 28 8.4 
			 2003 36 10.4 
			 2004 20 5.6 
			 2005 24 6.9 
			 (1) Stillbirths plus early neonatal deaths (deaths under seven days of age). (2) Stillbirths and early neonatal deaths per 1,000 live births and stillbirths.  Source: Office for National Statistics

Alcoholic Drinks: Young People

Tobias Ellwood: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many children were  (a) cautioned,  (b) prosecuted and  (c) given a penalty notice for disorder for buying or attempting to buy alcohol under age in each of the last three years for which information is available.

Vernon Coaker: The number of young persons under 18 years of age issued with; a reprimand or final warning, penalty notice for disorder, or proceeded against at magistrates courts for offences relating to buying or attempting to buy alcohol under age in England and Wales for the years 2004 to 2006 can be viewed in the following tables 1 and 2. From June 2000, cautions for offenders under 18 years old were replaced by reprimands and final warnings.
	
		
			  N umber of young persons aged under 18 years issued with a reprimand/final warning, and proceeded against at magistrates courts for a certain alcohol offences in England and Wales for the years 2004 to 2006( 1, 1, 3, 4, 5) 
			   Offence description 
			   Person under 18 buying or attempting to buy or consuming intoxicating liquor. Person under 18 buying or consuming intoxicating liquor  Purchase of alcohol by an individual under 18 
			   14316  14383 
			   Proceeded against  Reprimanded/Final warning( 3)  Proceeded against  Reprimanded/Final warning( 3) 
			 2004 10 32 — — 
			 2005 14 19 — 3 
			 2006 6 3 2 4 
			 - Nil (1) These data are on the principal offence basis. (2) Data includes the following offence descriptions and corresponding statutes:  Offence Code 14316 Person under 18 buying or attempting to buy or consuming intoxicating liquor. Person under 18 buying or consuming intoxicating liquor in Licensed premises. Licensing (Occasional Permissions) Act 1983 Schedule (Sec 3) para 4(2). Licensing Act 1964 Sec 169(2).  Offence Code 14382 Purchase of alcohol by an individual under 18. Licensing Act 2003 S. 149(l)(7a) (3) From 1 June 2000 the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 came into force nationally and removed the use of cautions for persons under 18 and replaced them with reprimands and final warnings. Reprimands and final warnings are included in the above data. (4) The Licensing Act 2003 came into force on 24 November 2005. (5) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts, other agencies, and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.  Source: Court proceedings data held by RDS—Office for Criminal Justice Reform—Ministry of Justice Our Ref: IOS 205-08 (Table 1) [Contribution for PQ 191306] 
		
	
	
		
			  N umber of young persons aged 16 to 17 years issued with a penalty notice for disorder for the offence—Buying or attempting to buy alcohol by person under 18 in England and Wales for the years 2004 to 2006( 1, 2, 3, 4) 
			   Buying or attempting to buy alcohol by person under 18 
			 2004 — 
			 2005 21 
			 2006 73 
			 - Nil (1) These data are on the principal offence basis. (2) Data includes the following offence descriptions and corresponding statute: Buying or attempting to buy alcohol by a person under 18. Section 149(l)of the Licensing Act 2003 (c.17) (3) New legislative reference with effect from, 24 November 2005 on implementation of Licensing Act 2003. (4) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts, other agencies, and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.  Source: Court proceedings data held by RDS—Office for Criminal Justice Reform Ministry of Justice Our Ref: IOS 205-08 (Table 2) [Contribution for PQ 191306]

Alcoholic Drinks: Young People

Tobias Ellwood: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many instances there were of alcohol found in the possession of children being seized in accordance with section 1 of the Confiscation of Alcohol (Young Persons) Act 1997 in each of the last three years; and how many people were  (a) cautioned,  (b) prosecuted and  (c) given a penalty notice for disorder having failed to comply with such a request in each of the last 10 years.

Vernon Coaker: Offences recorded under this legislation are summary offences and as such do not form part of the recorded crime statistics collected by the Home Office.
	The number of persons issued with a caution, and proceeded against at magistrates courts for offences under section 1 of the Confiscation of Alcohol (Young Persons) Act 1997 in England and Wales for the years 2004 to 2006 can be viewed in the following table.
	The offence is not one for which a PND (penalty notice for disorder) can be issued, as it is not part of the scheme.
	
		
			  N umber of persons issued with a caution, and proceeded against at magistrates courts for offences under section 1 of the Confiscation of Alcohol (Young Persons) Act 1997 in England and Wales for the years 2004 - 06( 1, 2, 3, 4) 
			   Proceeded against  Caution 
			 2004 12 2 
			 2005 14 10 
			 2006 19 5 
			 (1) These data are on the principal offence basis. (2 )Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts, other agencies, and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used. (3 )From 1 June 2000 the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 came into force nationally and removed the use of cautions for persons under 18 and replaced them with reprimands and final warnings. The total figure of reprimands and final warnings makes up cautions. (4 )Data includes the following statute and corresponding offence description: Confiscation of Alcohol (Young Persons) Act 1997 Sec.1. Police Reform Act 2002 Sch.4 para.6 (Confiscation of Alcohol (Young Persons) Act 1997 S.1). Failure to surrender intoxicating liquor and/or to state name and address. Contravening a community support officers' requirement to surrender liquor.  Source:  Court proceedings data held by RDS—Office for Criminal Justice Reform—Ministry of Justice

Alcoholic Drinks: Young People

Tobias Ellwood: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people were  (a) cautioned,  (b) prosecuted and  (c) given a penalty notice for disorder for buying or attempting to buy alcohol on behalf of a person under 18 years old in each of the last three years for which information is available.

Vernon Coaker: The number of persons issued with a caution, penalty notice for disorder or proceeded against at magistrates courts for offences relating to buying or attempting to buy alcohol on behalf of a person aged under 18 years in England and Wales for the years 2004 to 2006 can be viewed in the following tables 1 and 2.
	
		
			  N umber of persons issued with a caution, and proceeded against at magistrates courts for certain alcohol offences in England and Wales for the years 2004 - 06( 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) 
			   Offence description 
			   Buying or attempting to buy intoxicating liquor for consumption by a person under 18. Purchasing intoxicating liquor for consumption by person under 18 in bar  Person who buys or attempts to buy alcohol on behalf of an individual under 18. 
			   Proceeded against  Cautions( 3)  Proceeded against  Cautions( 3) 
			 2004 38 14 (6)— (6)— 
			 2005 29 12 (6)— 2 
			 2006 14 11 18 13 
			 (1) These data are on the principal offence basis. (2) Data includes the following offence descriptions and corresponding statutes:  Buying or attempting to buy intoxicating liquor for consumption by a person under 18.  Purchasing intoxicating liquor for consumption by person under 18 in bar.  Licensing (Occasional Permissions) Act 1983 Schedule (Sec 3) para 4(3). Licensing Act 1964 Sec 169(3).  Person who buys or attempts to buy alcohol on behalf of an individual under 18.  Licensing Act 2003 S149(3,4,7b) (3) From 1 June 2000 the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 came into force nationally and removed the use of cautions for persons under 18 and replaced them with reprimands and final warnings. Reprimands and final warnings are included in the abovementioned data. (4 )The Licensing Act 2003 came into force on 24 November 2005. (5 )Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts, other agencies, and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used. (6 )Nil  Source:  Court proceedings data held by RDS—Office for Criminal Justice Reform—Ministry of Justice 
		
	
	
		
			  N umber of persons issued with a penalty notice for disorder for the offences purchasing alcohol for under 18 and purchasing alcohol for under 18 for consumption on premises in England and Wales for the years 2004 - 06( 1, 2, 3, 4) 
			   Purchase alcohol for person under 18  Purchase alcohol for person under 18 for consumption on premises 
			 2004 18 66 
			 2005 170 83 
			 2006 407 60 
			 (1) These data are on the principal offence basis. (2 )Data includes the following offence descriptions and corresponding statute:  Buys or attempts to buy alcohol on behalf of person under 18 s149(3) of the Licensing Act 2003  Buys or attempts to buy alcohol for consumption on relevant premises by person under 18. s149(4) of the Licensing Act 2003 (3 )New legislative reference with effect from, 24 November 2005 on implementation of Licensing Act 2003 (4 )Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts, other agencies, and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.  Source:  Court proceedings data held by RDS—Office for Criminal Justice Reform—Ministry of Justice

Antisocial Behaviour Orders

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many antisocial behaviour orders were  (a) issued and  (b) breached since 31 December 2005, broken down by criminal justice system area.

Vernon Coaker: Data on how many antisocial behaviour orders have been issued and breached since 31 December 2005 is not yet available. Data from 1 January to 31 December for 2006 is due to be published shortly.

Criminal Records: Young People

John Hayes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people under the age of 18 years gained a criminal record in each year since 1997.

Vernon Coaker: Although annual figures for each year since 1997 are not available, the Statistical Bulletins on juvenile re-offending published by the Ministry of Justice show quarterly figures for the number of offenders aged 10-17, who at the time of receiving a reprimand, final warning or conviction had no previous offences.
	Figures are available for cohorts of offenders from the first quarters of 2000, 2004 and 2005. The cohorts are constructed in order to measure re-offending and therefore exclude juveniles receiving custodial sentences but include juveniles discharged from custody during each quarter.
	The numbers of juveniles with no previous offences in each of the quarterly cohorts were as follows:
	
		
			   Number 
			 2000 21,546 
			 2004 23,379 
			 2005 24,739 
		
	
	These figures have been derived from the police's administrative IT. system, which, as with any large scale recording system, is subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.

Departmental Carbon Emissions

John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether her Department met the target in the Sustainable Operations on the Government Estate to reverse the then upward trend in carbon emissions by April 2007.

Liam Byrne: My Department did not meet the sustainable operations target on the Government office estate to reverse the then upward trend in carbon emissions by April 2007. The target related to the Department's offices which increased substantially in number through the inclusion in the figures of the national probation service estate. After allowing for this, an increase in emissions of 12 per cent. occurred. There are a range of other factors that need to be taken into account, including density of occupation, IT provision and use of air-conditioning across the estate.

Departmental Public Relations

Jeremy Browne: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many external contracts her Department held with public relations companies in each of the last 10 years; and what the total cost of those contracts was.

Liam Byrne: Government policies and programmes affect the lives of millions of people, and in order for them to work they must be communicated effectively. The Home Office communicates directly to the public through individual campaigns that provide advice, information and reassurance. These campaigns are often supported by paid for PR activity which is essential to ensure broader reach of our target audiences.
	The following information details the number, nature and cost of PR contracts for the last five years (not including the current financial year). The costs include resources required to generate PR and any necessary supporting materials. Collating information for the last 10 years would incur disproportionate costs in terms of staff time.
	
		
			  Nature of PR contract  Cost (£) 
			  2002-03  
			  Contracts (Number) 4 
			  Total cost 257,484 
			 Drugs Misuse 79,219 
			 Criminal Justice 36,900 
			 Mobile Phone Safety 44,190 
			 Child Protection on the Internet 97,175 
			   
			  2003-04  
			  Contracts (Number) 5 
			  Total cost 975,909 
			 Holocaust Memorial Day 44,142 
			 Security Industry Authority 150,573 
			 Domestic Violence 75,000 
			 Sexual Offences Act 56,465 
			 Citizenship 650,729 
			   
			  2004-05  
			  Contracts (Number) 13 
			  Total cost 3,037,320 
			 Mobile Phone Safety 44,190 
			 Acquisitive Crime Reduction 260,373.99 
			 Antisocial Behaviour 646,570 
			 Sexual Offences Act 128,359 
			 Criminal Justice 982,410 
			 Domestic Violence 75,000 
			 Year of the Volunteer 210,789.95 
			 Police—High Potential Development 62,760 
			 Alcohol and Violent Crime 501,692 
			 Drugs 71,239 
			 Communities 18,412 
			 Familial Homicide 4,940 
			 Holocaust Memorial Day 30,586 
			   
			  2005-06  
			  Contracts (Number) 7 
			  Total cost 1,377,633 
			 Antisocial Behaviour 363,040 
			 Criminal Justice 265,780 
			 Year of the Volunteer 74,027 
			 Police—High Potential Development 41,400 
			 Community Support Officers Recruitment 2,380 
			 Tackling Violent Crime 156,620 
			 Drugs 474,386 
			   
			  2006-07  
			  Contracts (Number) 7 
			  Total cost 975,301 
			 Criminal Justice 174,473 
			 Community Sentences 193,181 
			 Drugs 374,666 
			 Single Non Emergency Number Pilots 29,186 
			 Community Support Officers Recruitment 113,511 
			 Police—High Potential Development 28,716 
			 Respect 61,568

Departmental Sustainable Development

John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether her Department is on course to meet the Sustainable Operations on the Government Estate targets  (a) to source at least 10 per cent. of its electricity from renewables by 31 March 2008 and  (b) to increase recycling figures to 40 per cent. of waste by 2010.

Liam Byrne: I direct the right hon. Member to the 2007 Sustainable Development in Government report, a copy of which is held in the House of Commons Library.

Deportation: EU Countries

Peter Luff: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if she will raise in the EU Justice and Home Affairs Council the procedures for notifying other member states when a member state deports an EU national from another state following conviction for a serious criminal offence; and if she will make a statement.

Liam Byrne: The UK Border Agency may disclose information to a foreign government regarding an individual's criminal conviction provided the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998 and Human Rights Act 1998 are met.

Heathrow Airport: Security

Tim Farron: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department for what reason it was decided to take fingerprint impressions from domestic transfer passengers at Heathrow airport; and what use was to be made of the information gathered.

Liam Byrne: holding answer 21 April 2008
	In the building of Terminal 5 at Heathrow, the British Airports Authority (BAA) took the decision to introduce a Common Departure Lounge (CDL). BAA was required to ensure that any immigration risks arising from the mixing of domestic and international passengers were mitigated.
	It is the intention that the admission of domestic passengers into the lounge will be controlled by means of biometric fingerprint enrolment together with a digital photograph, the details of which will then be validated at boarding. This system will ensure that only those individuals entitled to travel within the UK as a domestic passenger can do so. However, to ensure that the proposed system is fully validated by the Information Commissioner, it has been agreed that the system will operate using only digital photography until such validation is given.
	BAA has undertaken that all data obtained will immediately be encrypted and destroyed within 24 hours in accordance with the Data Protection Act. They have confirmed that data stored does not include any personal details and is not cross referenced with any other database or organisation.

Illegal Immigrants: China

Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many Chinese people have been arrested during raids carried out under the Stop Illegal Working Campaign; how many of those were found to be  (a) illegal workers and  (b) employers of illegal workers; and, of those found to be illegal workers, how many have been (i) deported, (ii) detained and (iii) released on bail.

Liam Byrne: From 14 January 2008 to 31 March 122 Chinese nationals were arrested following illegal working operations all of whom were found to be working illegally. We do not record the nationality of employers of illegal workers arrested. This information is derived from provisional local management information which may be subject to change.
	Information relating to questions (i) (ii) (iii) could be obtained only by the detailed examination of individual records at disproportionate cost.

Immigrants: Personal Records

Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what data her Department collects from landing cards completed by migrants arriving in the UK; and if she will make a statement.

Liam Byrne: All passengers who are citizens of countries outside of the European Economic Area and who arrive in the United Kingdom from outside of the Common Travel Area are required to complete their name, date of birth, nationality, gender, address in the United Kingdom and signature on a landing card.
	In cases where a passenger has been granted leave to enter, immigration officers will place any conditions of entry and an admission category on the landing card. In certain circumstances immigration officers will make notes on the reverse of the landing card about a passenger's intentions and duration of stay and will record details of their travel document. In cases such as these landing cards are copied and retained on microfiche.

Members: Correspondence

David Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when her Department expects to reply to the letter from the hon. Member for Aylesbury of 27th October 2007 about the case of Mr J K of Aylesbury (reference B30208/7; \\\\\k1031482/3) about which the hon. Member wrote to the Borders and Immigration Agency on 24th January.

Liam Byrne: holding answer 21 April 2008
	The UK Border Agency wrote to the hon. Member in relation to this matter on 27 February 2008. A further letter was sent on 4 April 2008.

Press

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many press office staff were employed by  (a) her Department,  (b) its agencies and  (c) its non-departmental public bodies (i) in each year since 1996-97 and (ii) at the latest date for which information is available.

Liam Byrne: Media relations for the whole Department and agencies are handled by the Home Office Communication Directorate based press office. Press office staff who deal with the media are employed at the information and senior information officer grades.
	The following table provides information on the numbers of staff employed or managed by the Communication Directorate during the past 10 years. Data on staff numbers in earlier years and non-departmental bodies are not held centrally and could be collected only at disproportionate cost.
	
		
			   Press officers 
			 1999 13 
			 2000 16 
			 2001(1) 31 
			 2002 35 
			 2003 39 
			 2004 43 
			 2005 38 
			 2006(2) 34 
			 2007 35 
			 March 2008(3) 32 
			 (1) Prison Service and core Home Office press office merged. (2) The total number of press officers for 2006 onwards Includes two part timers, who are employed as a job share. (3) Machinery of Government changes May 2007, 11 press officer posts transferred to the Ministry of Justice. The total also includes five Borders and Immigration Agency regional press officers; whose posts were created in 2007.

Prisoners: Foreigners

James Clappison: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what data is held by her Department on non-UK national detainees released from prison without notification to the Department at the time; and what estimate she has made of the number of non-UK national detainees not included in data at all, as referred to by the National Audit Office report Asylum and migration: a review of Home Office statistics (HC (2003-04) 625) of 25 May 2004.

Liam Byrne: The section of the National Audit Office report on Asylum and Migration statistics published on 25 May 2004 to which is referred relates to the accuracy of statistics held by IND (now known as the UK Border Agency) governing the number of individuals held in detention for immigration reasons.
	Since the report was published, the DELMIS system, to which it referred, has been superseded by a different system known as the Case Information Database (CID). This is designed for use within all areas of the agency as opposed to just the Detention Service Directorate. It is through CID that the agency is able to ensure that it keeps accurate records on all individuals' immigration cases as well as ensuring that caseworkers are aware of where an individual resided or whether they were detained.
	The chief executive of the UK Border Agency has written to the Home Affairs Committee on several occasions over the past 18 months and explained that we have reviewed and strengthened our processes in identifying those foreign nationals serving custodial sentences and should be considered for deportation following the events of April 2006.

Rape

David Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many allegations of rape were reported to the police by  (a) women and  (b) men in each of the last 10 years; how many reports of rape resulted in prosecutions; and how many such prosecutions were successful in each year.

Vernon Coaker: Details on the number of allegations of rape are not collected centrally.
	The Home Office collects crime statistics on the numbers of rape offences recorded by the police in England and Wales and data for 1997 to 2006-07 are given in table 1.
	Data showing the number of defendants proceeded against and found guilty of rape, in England and Wales, 1997 to 2006 are shown in table 2.
	The figures given in table 2 relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offence for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences, the offence selected is the one for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.
	Police recorded crime (notifiable) data and court proceedings data are not directly comparable. Recorded crime data, published on a financial year basis, concentrates on the numbers of offences and detections, whereas court proceedings data is published on a calendar year basis and concentrates on defendants.
	
		
			  Table 1: number of recorded offences of female and male rape, England and Wales, 1997 to 2006-07 
			   Offences recorded 
			 1997 6,628 
			 1997-98(1) 6,898 
			 1998-99(2,3) 7,636 
			 1999-2000(2,3) 8,409 
			 2000-01(2,3) 8,593 
			 2001-02(2,3) 9,734 
			 2002-03(4,5) 12,295 
			 2003-04(4,5) 13,272 
			 2004-05(4,5,6) 14,013 
			 2005-06(4,5,6) 14,443 
			 2006-07(4,5,6) 13,780 
			 (1) The number of crimes recorded in that financial year using the coverage and is in use until 31 March 1998. (2) The coverage was extended and counting rules revised from 1998-99. Figures from that date are not directly comparable with those for earlier years. (3) These data are prior to the introduction of the National Crime Recording Standard. These figures are not directly comparable with those for later years. (4) These data take account of the introduction of the National Crime Recording Standard in April 2002. These figures are not directly comparable with those for earlier years. (5) Includes British Transport Police from 2002-03. (6) The Sexual Offences Act 2003, introduced in May 2004, altered the definition and coverage of sexual offences. 
		
	
	
		
			  Table 2: number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty at all courts for rape( 1) , England and Wales, 1997 to 2006( 2,3) 
			   Proceeded against  Found guilty 
			 1997 1,961 618 
			 1998 2,185 675 
			 1999 2,169 659 
			 2000(4) 2,046 598 
			 2001 2,651 572 
			 2002 2,945 655 
			 2003 2,790 673 
			 2004 2,689 751 
			 2005 2,826 796 
			 2006 2,567 863 
			 (1) Includes rape of a female, rape of a male, attempted rape of a female and attempted rape of a male. (2) These data are on the principal offence basis. (3) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete, however, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used. (4) Staffordshire police force were only able to supply a sample of data for magistrates courts proceedings covering one full week in each quarter for 2000. Estimates based on this sample are included in the figures.